Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 04, 2008, 04:23:42 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Visit ReillyMotorSports
* Home Help Search Memberlist gallery Login Register
+  The BigBlockDart Message Board
|-+  Technical
| |-+  Body, Paint, Interior, Wiring
| | |-+  POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator  (Read 565 times)
guzzimike
BBD God
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2731


1968 Dart GT (383)


POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« on: April 08, 2006, 10:26:36 PM »

Anyone have a preference/opinions between these two products..?

TIA
Logged

jims440
Guest


Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2006, 11:32:48 PM »

I'ved used both and POR 15 works best in my opinion.  Word of advice.  Don't get it on you or you'll be wearing black for as long as it takes to grow new skin!

Jims 440
Logged
azz7772
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 783

BigBlockDart.Com


Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2006, 01:27:09 AM »

i am using rust bullet

 http://www.rust-bullet.com/
Logged
Ryan (Strange246)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 875


Merrimack NH

strange246 strange2462000
WWW Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2006, 10:02:37 AM »

One of the magazines had an independent test a while back, POR vs. Eastwood, they liked the Rust Encapsulator better, they said it prevented "rust creep" better, thats where the rust creeps out from under the product.....I've used the Encapsulator throughout my project and I'm real happy with it, but as with the POR, get it on you and it's there to stay, but atleast you wont rust LOL

Ryan
Logged

"Faster! Faster! Until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of Death!"
Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

Former God with 1850 Prior posts Smiley

https://home.comcast.net/~72demon/
sycboi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 711


Norwalk, Ohio

bgpoppahall sycboi bgpoppahall
Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2006, 06:45:10 PM »

ZeroRust  (basically the same as Eastwoods stuff if not the exact same product).
Logged

SuperBeast
'70 Dart
Roller 383 w/ much aluminum
Viper T-56, StreetTwin, hydraulic throwout, HD Dana 60, AlterKtion
An enforcer for the Mopar Mafia!
Teeto
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 91

BigBlockDart.Com


Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2006, 08:09:26 PM »

I have used the por-15 and personally think it sucks. I used it to brush on and it streaked really bad its thin and runny. The can says to put plastic in between the lid and can to prevent it from sticking down and all that did was get the top of the product rock hard. Then I had to poke holes in the hard stuff to get to the liquid. I probably ended up wasting half the can because of that. Then you had to contend with the chunks that drop into the can because it skims over on the top. Pretty un user friendly if you ask me and I will not use it again.
Logged
sycboi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 711


Norwalk, Ohio

bgpoppahall sycboi bgpoppahall
Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2006, 08:39:19 PM »

I like the way ZeroRust "soaks" into the metal and stops rust "creep".  It's like a convertor/top coat all in one product!  The Por-15 applied to my Firebird Trans Am back a few years ago never impressed me, and led me to finding out about the ZeroRust.
Logged

SuperBeast
'70 Dart
Roller 383 w/ much aluminum
Viper T-56, StreetTwin, hydraulic throwout, HD Dana 60, AlterKtion
An enforcer for the Mopar Mafia!
azz7772
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 783

BigBlockDart.Com


Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2006, 12:42:34 PM »

I have used the por-15 and personally think it sucks. I used it to brush on and it streaked really bad its thin and runny. The can says to put plastic in between the lid and can to prevent it from sticking down and all that did was get the top of the product rock hard. Then I had to poke holes in the hard stuff to get to the liquid. I probably ended up wasting half the can because of that. Then you had to contend with the chunks that drop into the can because it skims over on the top. Pretty un user friendly if you ask me and I will not use it again.

to fix that problem put your lid on as tight as posible without wrecking the seal then store your can upside down if the top creates a skin it will now be the bottom get it  Cool
Logged
Teeto
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 91

BigBlockDart.Com


Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2006, 03:48:03 PM »

Good idea but the plastic I stuck under the lid didn't let you push the lid down tight enough to actually seal without wreaking the seal. Im thinking thats why it skimmed over in the first place. I will be trying the eastwood stuff next time.
Logged
sr71mopar
BBD God
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1002


Santa Rosa, CA.


Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2006, 04:09:04 PM »

I've had pretty good luck with Rustmort.
Logged
PureGTS
BBD God
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1093


I don't have kids; I have a herd!


Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2006, 09:41:55 PM »

I've got a couple tests going with the POR15. I used it for the splash guards behind the front wheels of the Dart and, the acid test or jack acid test depending on your point of view, on the thermostat housing. I have, however, experinced the incredible adhesive property of POR15 quite by accident. I didn't put the palstic under the lid before closing the can and destroyed the can prying the lid off the next time I wanted to use it. It literally took and striaghtened the wavey lip of the paint can area around the lid completely out before forcing me to tear the lid off. That's some serious sticky if you ask me.
  As for the tests results, they are going to take some time as the Dart currently is not on the road. But we are hopeful.
Logged

Knowldge is power, power is speed, speed is good, low E.T. is better
rumblefish
Guest


Email
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2006, 11:22:37 PM »

Id bet you'd finish it quicker if it werent for the electric kool aid acid tests   \/][
Logged
Lars
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 982


ATX


Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2006, 04:49:31 AM »

Can you put the Rust Encap straight on top of rust? Or do you have to prep the surface first?
Logged

365/727/8.75 with 4.10's and a Detroit locker

BrianT
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 241


It's 1978 all over again!!


Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2006, 10:45:17 AM »

I am using ZeroRust on my floorboard project and it seems to be working well.  Covers good and the finish is a nice flat black.  Not that anyone will ever see it again!
Logged


67 Dart 340
"Doing everything ass backwards"
Duster440
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 499


Blasphemous custom Duster


WWW
Re: POR15 versus Eastwood Rust Encapsulator
« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2006, 08:15:22 PM »

I've used both Zero-Rust and the Eastwood product with good results - brushed or sprayed. I've read a number of complaints surrounding the use of Por-15. Here's a side by side comparison of the two products:

http://www.autobodystore.com/new_page_1.htm
Logged



Preston H. - Duster project at: www.70Duster440.com
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP The BigBlockDart Message Board | Powered by SMF 1.0.5.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media. All Rights Reserved.
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!