![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the homework, Greg! We are in your debt.
It is interesting to hear that there is a difference in the processing. I am also interested to see that there was no statement that the roofing material would hurt the fish...altho he did say it would take several years for the leaching process to be a problem. We will watch with interest! I note that our roofing lines does not seem to inhibit growth of algae! or other pond plants. There is also no visible effect on the fish. I am glad if pondguard is cured for potable situation standards. I still have significant questions about whether roff guard may not be equally effective for fish ponds. Fot the price diffefrence and no visible effect difference difference, I am still satisfied with the roof guard. Phyllis and I will have to monitor what happens as our roofguard ages further. J -- ____________________________________________ Check out Jog-A-Thon fundraiser (clears $140+ per jogger) at: www.jogathon.net See our pond at: http://www.home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-jameshurley "Gregory Young" wrote in message ... Hi all: To settle the discussion (I can't locate the original thread) as to whether or not there are differences between roofing liner (Firestone Rubbergard line), and pond liner (Firestone PondGard), I called Firestone today in my "official capacity" with the state to get the straight answer. I talked first to TH, who could not answer my "detailed" questions, who referred me to BJ, one of their engineers. Firestone called me back, to confirm I was who I stated I was, before they would go into specifics. I was told the specifics, but can share only generalities with you in this forum. You make your own decisions.. The bottom line, according to Firestone, there is a "decided difference" between the 2 liners: 1) I questioned why the MSD sheets (Material Safety Data sheets) another NG reader had shared with us comparing the 2 products seemed so similar. Their answer: Manufacturers are required only to list potential hazards of their products along with the general type of material, physical, chemical, etc properties, etc. They are not required to list individual components as long as any potential properties of them are included in the above for their product. Their processes and product lines are patent protected. The MSD sheets may look similar, according to Firestone, but they are not. In fact he said to be sure to notice that under the product identification section, the chemical name descriptor, PondGard is listed as "cured rubber material", with no similar reference in their roofing line MSD sheet. Why? .. read on. 2) Their roofing liner has "additional processing", which "adds certain chemicals useful to extend the life of the material". He would not identify the specific agents added, except to agree with me that "some" companies add plant inhibiting compounds to their roofing liner. 3) More importantly, the 2 are "cured differently". PondGard meets rigid specs. for potable water to "insure Koifish kept in peoples' ponds are not affected". In fact this liner could be used to hold potable water based on its curing process, although he was very clear that Firestone does NOT warrant this liner for that purpose! Their roofing liner (made at the same plant, and using the same overall equipment) is NOT cured in this fashion. There are no provisions in the processing of the roofing liner to inhibit chemicals from leaching out of the material, although he projected this would take at least 3 or 4 years to become an issue. 4) There is nothing to "wash off" of their products, for either use. As the chemicals are incorporated into the material, "they can not be washed out." 5) The difference in the price they charge to dealers is based on the curing process of the PondGard, which ensures "there will be no leaching of chemicals, until its warranted lifespan has been exceeded". He stated they do NOT spend the $$ on this curing process, and label some material coming off their line as PondGard, and other as Rubbergard. It would be a waste of $$. Dealers clearly have a healthy mark-up on PondGard, from what was shared. 6) The bottom line, I asked if it were him, and this was to be used in a potable situation (for fish again, not for drinking water for people), what would he do. He stated he would "certainly pay more and get the right material". Now you have the facts direct from Firestone, who make PondGard. That is one product from one company, so you can not automatically generalize the above statements to other companies. Happy ponding, Greg |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Maybe the pond with crazy water that's killing goldfish in 10 minutes was
made with Rubbergard.... "Phyllis and Jim Hurley" wrote in message .. . Thanks for the homework, Greg! We are in your debt. It is interesting to hear that there is a difference in the processing. I am also interested to see that there was no statement that the roofing material would hurt the fish...altho he did say it would take several years for the leaching process to be a problem. We will watch with interest! I note that our roofing lines does not seem to inhibit growth of algae! or other pond plants. There is also no visible effect on the fish. I am glad if pondguard is cured for potable situation standards. I still have significant questions about whether roff guard may not be equally effective for fish ponds. Fot the price diffefrence and no visible effect difference difference, I am still satisfied with the roof guard. Phyllis and I will have to monitor what happens as our roofguard ages further. J -- ____________________________________________ Check out Jog-A-Thon fundraiser (clears $140+ per jogger) at: www.jogathon.net See our pond at: http://www.home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-jameshurley "Gregory Young" wrote in message ... Hi all: To settle the discussion (I can't locate the original thread) as to whether or not there are differences between roofing liner (Firestone Rubbergard line), and pond liner (Firestone PondGard), I called Firestone today in my "official capacity" with the state to get the straight answer. I talked first to TH, who could not answer my "detailed" questions, who referred me to BJ, one of their engineers. Firestone called me back, to confirm I was who I stated I was, before they would go into specifics. I was told the specifics, but can share only generalities with you in this forum. You make your own decisions.. The bottom line, according to Firestone, there is a "decided difference" between the 2 liners: 1) I questioned why the MSD sheets (Material Safety Data sheets) another NG reader had shared with us comparing the 2 products seemed so similar. Their answer: Manufacturers are required only to list potential hazards of their products along with the general type of material, physical, chemical, etc properties, etc. They are not required to list individual components as long as any potential properties of them are included in the above for their product. Their processes and product lines are patent protected. The MSD sheets may look similar, according to Firestone, but they are not. In fact he said to be sure to notice that under the product identification section, the chemical name descriptor, PondGard is listed as "cured rubber material", with no similar reference in their roofing line MSD sheet. Why? .. read on. 2) Their roofing liner has "additional processing", which "adds certain chemicals useful to extend the life of the material". He would not identify the specific agents added, except to agree with me that "some" companies add plant inhibiting compounds to their roofing liner. 3) More importantly, the 2 are "cured differently". PondGard meets rigid specs. for potable water to "insure Koifish kept in peoples' ponds are not affected". In fact this liner could be used to hold potable water based on its curing process, although he was very clear that Firestone does NOT warrant this liner for that purpose! Their roofing liner (made at the same plant, and using the same overall equipment) is NOT cured in this fashion. There are no provisions in the processing of the roofing liner to inhibit chemicals from leaching out of the material, although he projected this would take at least 3 or 4 years to become an issue. 4) There is nothing to "wash off" of their products, for either use. As the chemicals are incorporated into the material, "they can not be washed out." 5) The difference in the price they charge to dealers is based on the curing process of the PondGard, which ensures "there will be no leaching of chemicals, until its warranted lifespan has been exceeded". He stated they do NOT spend the $$ on this curing process, and label some material coming off their line as PondGard, and other as Rubbergard. It would be a waste of $$. Dealers clearly have a healthy mark-up on PondGard, from what was shared. 6) The bottom line, I asked if it were him, and this was to be used in a potable situation (for fish again, not for drinking water for people), what would he do. He stated he would "certainly pay more and get the right material". Now you have the facts direct from Firestone, who make PondGard. That is one product from one company, so you can not automatically generalize the above statements to other companies. Happy ponding, Greg |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Could be. Whose pond was that? Might be worth a small experiment to see if
it happens under controlled circumstances...like put a rosey red in an aquarium, be sure it is OK, add roofing liner, see what happens. Hmmmm I can do that with gambusia! I think I will. I'll let you know. J -- ____________________________________________ Check out Jog-A-Thon fundraiser (clears $140+ per jogger) at: www.jogathon.net See our pond at: http://www.home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-jameshurley "Sam Hopkins" wrote in message .. . Maybe the pond with crazy water that's killing goldfish in 10 minutes was made with Rubbergard.... "Phyllis and Jim Hurley" wrote in message .. . Thanks for the homework, Greg! We are in your debt. It is interesting to hear that there is a difference in the processing. I am also interested to see that there was no statement that the roofing material would hurt the fish...altho he did say it would take several years for the leaching process to be a problem. We will watch with interest! I note that our roofing lines does not seem to inhibit growth of algae! or other pond plants. There is also no visible effect on the fish. I am glad if pondguard is cured for potable situation standards. I still have significant questions about whether roff guard may not be equally effective for fish ponds. Fot the price diffefrence and no visible effect difference difference, I am still satisfied with the roof guard. Phyllis and I will have to monitor what happens as our roofguard ages further. J -- ____________________________________________ Check out Jog-A-Thon fundraiser (clears $140+ per jogger) at: www.jogathon.net See our pond at: http://www.home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-jameshurley "Gregory Young" wrote in message ... Hi all: To settle the discussion (I can't locate the original thread) as to whether or not there are differences between roofing liner (Firestone Rubbergard line), and pond liner (Firestone PondGard), I called Firestone today in my "official capacity" with the state to get the straight answer. I talked first to TH, who could not answer my "detailed" questions, who referred me to BJ, one of their engineers. Firestone called me back, to confirm I was who I stated I was, before they would go into specifics. I was told the specifics, but can share only generalities with you in this forum. You make your own decisions.. The bottom line, according to Firestone, there is a "decided difference" between the 2 liners: 1) I questioned why the MSD sheets (Material Safety Data sheets) another NG reader had shared with us comparing the 2 products seemed so similar. Their answer: Manufacturers are required only to list potential hazards of their products along with the general type of material, physical, chemical, etc properties, etc. They are not required to list individual components as long as any potential properties of them are included in the above for their product. Their processes and product lines are patent protected. The MSD sheets may look similar, according to Firestone, but they are not. In fact he said to be sure to notice that under the product identification section, the chemical name descriptor, PondGard is listed as "cured rubber material", with no similar reference in their roofing line MSD sheet. Why? .. read on. 2) Their roofing liner has "additional processing", which "adds certain chemicals useful to extend the life of the material". He would not identify the specific agents added, except to agree with me that "some" companies add plant inhibiting compounds to their roofing liner. 3) More importantly, the 2 are "cured differently". PondGard meets rigid specs. for potable water to "insure Koifish kept in peoples' ponds are not affected". In fact this liner could be used to hold potable water based on its curing process, although he was very clear that Firestone does NOT warrant this liner for that purpose! Their roofing liner (made at the same plant, and using the same overall equipment) is NOT cured in this fashion. There are no provisions in the processing of the roofing liner to inhibit chemicals from leaching out of the material, although he projected this would take at least 3 or 4 years to become an issue. 4) There is nothing to "wash off" of their products, for either use. As the chemicals are incorporated into the material, "they can not be washed out." 5) The difference in the price they charge to dealers is based on the curing process of the PondGard, which ensures "there will be no leaching of chemicals, until its warranted lifespan has been exceeded". He stated they do NOT spend the $$ on this curing process, and label some material coming off their line as PondGard, and other as Rubbergard. It would be a waste of $$. Dealers clearly have a healthy mark-up on PondGard, from what was shared. 6) The bottom line, I asked if it were him, and this was to be used in a potable situation (for fish again, not for drinking water for people), what would he do. He stated he would "certainly pay more and get the right material". Now you have the facts direct from Firestone, who make PondGard. That is one product from one company, so you can not automatically generalize the above statements to other companies. Happy ponding, Greg |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Interesting Rich..
I didn't think of the antioxidant compounds, figuring the roofing liner would be covered by shingles, providing some level of protection, once the shingles seal in.... I was trying to establish if they added any low level herbicides, which I have heard from various contractors that some roofing liners have. I could not get an answer to that, other than he acknowledged some do... Again, thanks for the wonderful hospitality you and Donna shared with us while we were in Va! I am going to send you the pics I promised, once I get caught up. Had a series of problems (some major) when I got home.. Should have known Murphy hits whenever I leave for even a short vacation! 1 of the 6 left to resolve, then I can start playing again. The 8 koi look very happy with their new home, and the electric fencing has done the trick with the mink.. at least so far. Greg -- "RichToyBox" wrote in message news ![]() "Gregory Young" wrote in message ... Hi all: The bottom line, according to Firestone, there is a "decided difference" between the 2 liners: The MSD sheets may look similar, according to Firestone, but they are not. In fact he said to be sure to notice that under the product identification section, the chemical name descriptor, PondGard is listed as "cured rubber material", with no similar reference in their roofing line MSD sheet. Why? All rubber products have to be cured, (vulcanized), but the method of cure may be different. Some of the rubber products are cured by microwave, some by brine solution, some by heated form, but the heat has to be there for some time for the molecules to chemically bond, to give the properties desired, such as tensile strength, hardness, elongation. 2) Their roofing liner has "additional processing", which "adds certain chemicals useful to extend the life of the material". He would not identify the specific agents added, except to agree with me that "some" companies add plant inhibiting compounds to their roofing liner. I suspect the additional chemicals used in the roofing liner, that would not be needed in pond liner is antioxidants. The roofing would be subject to ozone in the atmosphere, that the pond would not be subjected to. I have seen oils and waxes used as antioxidants, and both will migrate to the surface of the rubber sample during ozone testing. If insufficient amounts are present, the rubber cracks like old tires on a parked car. Whether these would be toxic or not, I don't know. -- RichToyBox http://www.geocities.com/richtoybox/pondintro.html . Happy ponding, Greg |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
BErney,
How did you test the 'one of each' that you bought? Maybe my experiment is not needed! I don't question that they may do some different things to the roof liner, but I am not at all convinced that the difference makes a difference for fish. Did you find any difference at all? Jim -- ____________________________________________ Check out Jog-A-Thon fundraiser (clears $140+ per jogger) at: www.jogathon.net See our pond at: http://www.home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-jameshurley "BErney1014" wrote in message ... To settle the discussion (I can't locate the original thread) as to whether or not there are differences between roofing liner (Firestone Rubbergard line), and pond liner (Firestone PondGard), I called Firestone today I did the same thing - 6 years ago. I forget the guy I spoke with. There was a change in formulation for the UV/mold/fungus etc. that was reported to kill fish quickly. Firestone knew about the stories and their marketing was that it wouldn't happen with the pondguard. I have no idea if the stories were substantiated. The bottom line was the pond version didn't have the same additives the roofing version needed. He was unable to give straight forward info due to the newsgroup claiming the only difference was the white paint on the pondguard logo vs. the batch codes on the roofing membrane. The newsgroup was of the opinion Firestone was breaking the law charging different prices for the same material. The newsgroup (this one) caused Firestone to get ****ed and they stopped talking. I bought one of each. No difference in performance. No dead fish. I was faxed the MSD sheets too and they were not helpful. The only liner to ever spring a leak was the pondguard. ;-) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The referenced link still brings you back to the same MSD sheets, that were
posted by another before. Firestone is not going to identify how the 2 materials differ as far as potability/fish safety, other than what I posted above (after my discussion with them). Now that I hear about the legal issues that may have been thrown at them in the past, I can understand why they are reticent, at least from their viewpoint. Happy ponding, Greg -- "FBCS" wrote in message ... I came across this link for Firestone. Water feature Liner comparison http://www.firestonebpco.com/special...ucts/index.htm "Gregory Young" wrote in message ... Hi all: To settle the discussion (I can't locate the original thread) as to whether or not there are differences between roofing liner (Firestone Rubbergard line), and pond liner (Firestone PondGard), I called Firestone today in my "official capacity" with the state to get the straight answer. I talked first to TH, who could not answer my "detailed" questions, who referred me to BJ, one of their engineers. Firestone called me back, to confirm I was who I stated I was, before they would go into specifics. I was told the specifics, but can share only generalities with you in this forum. You make your own decisions.. The bottom line, according to Firestone, there is a "decided difference" between the 2 liners: 1) I questioned why the MSD sheets (Material Safety Data sheets) another NG reader had shared with us comparing the 2 products seemed so similar. Their answer: Manufacturers are required only to list potential hazards of their products along with the general type of material, physical, chemical, etc properties, etc. They are not required to list individual components as long as any potential properties of them are included in the above for their product. Their processes and product lines are patent protected. The MSD sheets may look similar, according to Firestone, but they are not. In fact he said to be sure to notice that under the product identification section, the chemical name descriptor, PondGard is listed as "cured rubber material", with no similar reference in their roofing line MSD sheet. Why? .. read on. 2) Their roofing liner has "additional processing", which "adds certain chemicals useful to extend the life of the material". He would not identify the specific agents added, except to agree with me that "some" companies add plant inhibiting compounds to their roofing liner. 3) More importantly, the 2 are "cured differently". PondGard meets rigid specs. for potable water to "insure Koifish kept in peoples' ponds are not affected". In fact this liner could be used to hold potable water based on its curing process, although he was very clear that Firestone does NOT warrant this liner for that purpose! Their roofing liner (made at the same plant, and using the same overall equipment) is NOT cured in this fashion. There are no provisions in the processing of the roofing liner to inhibit chemicals from leaching out of the material, although he projected this would take at least 3 or 4 years to become an issue. 4) There is nothing to "wash off" of their products, for either use. As the chemicals are incorporated into the material, "they can not be washed out." 5) The difference in the price they charge to dealers is based on the curing process of the PondGard, which ensures "there will be no leaching of chemicals, until its warranted lifespan has been exceeded". He stated they do NOT spend the $$ on this curing process, and label some material coming off their line as PondGard, and other as Rubbergard. It would be a waste of $$. Dealers clearly have a healthy mark-up on PondGard, from what was shared. 6) The bottom line, I asked if it were him, and this was to be used in a potable situation (for fish again, not for drinking water for people), what would he do. He stated he would "certainly pay more and get the right material". Now you have the facts direct from Firestone, who make PondGard. That is one product from one company, so you can not automatically generalize the above statements to other companies. Happy ponding, Greg |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
how much cheaper is the roofing liner compared to the pond liner?
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
where can i find cheap roofing liner online
i've found countless online pond liner dealers but am having troubles finding the roofing material i need 2x 50x100' rolls, which i probably won't find @ the local bigbox thx sk |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Roofing Liner | Priscilla McCullough | General | 8 | August 19th 03 06:27 PM |
Boulders coming out of pond will show liner | John Arruda | General | 0 | July 29th 03 02:43 AM |
Xavan pond liner/ pond lights | David | General | 1 | July 21st 03 06:12 PM |
New Liner Over Old? | Bonnie Espenshade | General | 2 | July 12th 03 03:50 AM |