kochj

I have used both.....
I have come to this conclusion.........

If you are a novice shrink covering applier.... Go with the easiest to apply....and look good, use H9 Ultracote.....

If you know what you are doing and have had experience with both.... GO with Monokote.....

Monokote is much more durable if applied correctly....
Is really easy to apply multi-layer colors when you use trim solvent..............goes on easy and stays on forever...........

I have strugled with monokote at times, but I have found the shrinkability of Ultracote to a weekness at times......
Especially with the NEW-lightweight-building tech's of the aerobatic planes out today....
WIth soooo many lightening holes in them,joining seems around them can be a real mess.....

The adheasionability of Monokote is awsome..and that is what really counts
when you don't want oil soaking in corners of exsposed wood because the Ultracote has pulled off.

If Monokote is to be pulled OFF a plane, it is a NIGHMARE..... Easpecially if it was applied with too much heat.....
The color separates from the clear plastic.....and a long lengthy process ensouses.....

Again neither are perfect..... But if you want easy.... and look good....GO with Ultracote.....
If you want look the best and logevity.... go with Monokote.....
The reward is worth it...but the learning curve is a a bear!!!



</p>

tassiemark

I have done a few builds now, started with Ultracote and found it is easy to work with,especially for those starting out,iron temp seems slightly less critical with Ultracote and it does love shrinking down around wingtips without a single wrinkle or crease once you learn to add a bit more heat.
Now recently I have expanded to using Monokote also,this is where it gets interesting.... I bought a roll off Flat Tan Monokote and used it cover the bottom of the wings of a Hog Bipe,was not really impressed as I had to fight with it all the way,but I did end up getting it to work and it turned out good,now that is with the new Monokote thats being sold now. I figured I would give it the benefit of the doubt and bought off Ebay around a dozen brand new rolls of circa 1991 Super Monokote in various colours from a vendor who was selling up for a longgone hobby retailer who had closed up shop but kept the stock in mothballs.
Wow what a lucky strike that was as this Super Monokote is lovely stuff to work with in my opinion and does shrink easily, and it really looks to have a far moredepth to its sheen. I have been using it in conjuction with Ultracote on my models ever since,only drawback is eventually I am gonna run out of the old rolls and I might be tempted to try some new Monokote but I think I will be disappointed with that.
So if you see anyone selling old Super Monokote still new in rolls buy it and try it!


Here is a pic of my last build, a Sig Kougar, white Ultracote,yellow Ultracote, the rest is the Monokote mentioned,some done with windex method.

mike31

My Feedback: (67)

I use Jiffy Kote. ie. A roll of clear packing tape. Works great at the field and can be removed to make final repairs.

mcdanman2003

My Feedback: (3)

Where does Tower Kote fit in compared to MK and UC

Osirisf16

Hmm, seems i'll try ultracote first and then maybe try some monocote. Thanks

ilbcnuairborne

My Feedback: (2)

I don't understand the question. Ultracote, Oracover and Monokote are made of polyester. Each has the pigment applied and each has a heat sensitive adhesive. They all stretch and shrink with heat. There is some difference in weight but not enough to make much difference. How do you determine "Best"?

toesupwa

You try Solarfilm and Solartex... and then throw away all that Ultracote, Oracover and Monokote rubbish...

tony0707

hi     monocoat is a bit more shinny-  (   plastic looking )   ultracoat looks more like a paint job-   and will go around compound curves much better    -ex.those big round fusesif having a problem with the heat of the day-making wrinklesput a pin hole or two in each open bay of a wing-   i do like to work with ultra coat  more i think the color of the monocoat you are using seems to effect the way it works-(white harder than black )-the monocoats that have lasted me years without any lifting  are the transparent colors- (  20 years -no lifting  )but only use them on the top side of a wing or you will have a problem seeing the plane clearly in the air -with the light coming thru the wing-the transparents are also lighter -have had my best experience with the transparent monocoats staying put of all coverings i have ever used

jessiej

Both are ok, neither is as good as silk and dope if one is willing to invest the effort. Much depends on the project and, naturally, all depends upon individual preferences.

jess

Murdoc

How exactly do you cover with silk and dope? I know nothing about it, but it seems interesting to do. And jiffy cote also sounded awesome!

mike31

My Feedback: (67)

Silk and dope is a labor of love. Must be done right. You can't apply real heavy or the dope goes thru the silk and globs up on the inside adding excessive weight. I did a VK Fokker Triplane 30 years ago and the silk has since cracked and pealed. Yes I still have the plane. Many coats of a clear to prep, then as many coats of the finish color(s) to complete. Builders call. It does consume time, but the finish is second to none.

army_eod

How about silkspan or other such covering?

Seriously. I have used monokote and another fabric looking iron on in the past.

Wondering if there are other coverings suitable for a kit built park flyer?

ChuckW

There are lightweight iron on's for park flyer type airplanes. You could also use tissue. It's old-school but I think it would work great on a light airplane.

kochj

I heard this as well.....Wish they would had kept the OLD formula....as I HEAR it is the BOMB@@@@@

I think the best way is a combination of the two.....Monokote for top-layers and Orocover for base cote...

jib

Ken,

This is not currently a valid comparison, with GMfiling.

Preferences: While I prefer covering in UC, I like trimming in MC, using the windex method.

Jack
</p>

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Jack,
That's ok, Idrivea Nissan!!!

Ken

goirish

Well CGRetired and I drive a Volvo.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

A trick I learned from my dad as a kid was to stick to one color scheme (I use Red White and Blue) This way, any "Leftovers" can be used next time and you don't wind up with a box of mismatched colors. (Of course, you still may need the occasional Yellow for a cub, etc. but it really keeps the odd colors from piling up)

Ok, here's the scoop on MK vs UC:

If you know anything about painting, this is a good analogy - MK is like Lacquer and UC is like Enamel. Lacquer will give you a nicer finish, but it's a lot more critical in its application whereas you can just slap enamel on and it will look good.

Next, MK's adhesive is more permanent. Once it's on, it's hard to get off and the longer it's on the more difficult it becomes to get off whereas UC can be easily heated and removed.

Also, UC shrinks and stretches a LOT more, so wrinkles are much easier to remove.

Now, here's the tricky part of using MK... We all know that they both shrink, BUT, as you learned back in 6th grade science class, when you heat something, it EXPANDS. This is also true of covering. As you heat covering it starts to expand, then, once it reaches a certain temp, it begins to shrink.

So this creates a problem - Due to the expansion, unless you are EXTREMELY careful, you're going to get a wrinkle somwhere.

Now, here's the rub - If you iron down a wrinkle with MK, it is there for good, but if you iron down a wrinkle with UC, just keep applying heat and it will pull out.

This is due to two factors: First, unlike MK, UC's adhesive will release from itself (once MK's adhesive sticks to itself, it takes an ape with an air-hammer to get it unstuck) Combine that with the fact that UC shrinks so much, the wrinkle comes out easily.

I also find that UC is not as brittle as MK. When it's cold, just a slight bump can split MK. UD tends to dent rather than break and a little heat will pull the dent right out.

goirish

Whew!!!!!  I didn't know that.

kochj

Verry true minnflyer!!.....

The MK, one you iron down the wrinkle you are screwed......

I have learned to not ever touch the wrinkle with a iron....only a heat gun, or just use the heat of a iron...or it will stick....

Iron down the edges first, and then heat the middle.....but do not secure or have the covering adheare to the middle until it is absolutily neccissary.

tucker1865

My Feedback: (6)

I have always dreaded the covering of a new plane soI did an experiment on a trainer awhile back. Top half was Ultracote and bottom was Monocote. After 3 months the Monocote had the look of a aligator and the Ultracote was still like new. I used Mono on the wings cause I had some and found it inconsistant in shrinking between rolls. Next covering job will be Ultracote on the wings. When the Monocote is gone I will be using Ultracote most of the time. Only advantage with Monocote is you can use the windex method, so I will use whats left for trim.

ScienceisCool

My Feedback: (1)

Do you "need" a heat gun for Ultracote or can you shrink it with the iron?

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

You CAN use just the iron - I did for many years. But once I tried a heat gun I never looked back

Murdoc

Is it any good methods to avoid warps in the wing when you shrink the covering? I just covered a little parkflyer and the result was awesome. But during pre flight inspection I noticed that the wings was warped, and they was 100% straight before I covered it. </p>

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Twist the wing in the opposite direction and re-heat the covering. It'll straighten out (but it might take a little patience)