redfox435cat

it isn't the same stuff. also they are applying it cold with an adhesive activator then shrinking it, either way I've yet to get an ARF I didn't have to spend an hour with the heat gun on.

bps

My Feedback: (3)

I am finishing up my last roll of Monojunk..err.. Monocoat. The tex's are a much better covering in my opinion. Seems to me this stuff has changed in the many years I have used it. I think I might try Ultracoat just for the experience of it. Tough to justify the weight on a smaller plane but the ultimate is polyester fabric like Sig's Koverall for lightest weight and for the larger planes the Stitts.
JEB

chashint

Who says fabric does not add to the structural integrity and plastic film does ??
Koverall can be shrunk much tighter than any of the plastic films and it is glued to the entire framework.
If anything it contributes more to the structural integrity of the model than plastic film does.
Another great benefit of a Koverall covering job is that it does not sag, bubble, or peel at the seams ... ever.

deanwesterburg

I have seen some nice koveral jobs and that stuff turns a framed fuselage into a baseball bat! I 100% agree with chashint.. It's strong and it is nice to work with on large aircraft that can handle the additional weight. Also, I think it would be easier to paint on or mask off areas to do a really complicated color scheme..

I have done a few schemes in monokote/sig supercote and think I would have rather painted them on.. The occasional bubble or wrinkle re-appearing in plastic is a great way to ruin your day as well.. I don't like trying to re-shrink covering once there are multiple layers on there for the color scheam.

I would think anything smaller than a 40 sized model and the additional weight of koveral and paint might be a bit much, but I have very little experience with the stuff so I could be all wrong.. That's all they had back before plastic!

2slow2matter

My Feedback: (1)

I'm not against fabric. I've used it myself on a cub. The fact is an open weave will stretch more than shrunk plastic. I've used both--extensively. I cannot comment on Koverall brand, as I've never used it. but coverite remains somewhat flexible--even after shrinking. That's my take after using it.

Michaelj2k

When Moneykote (that's what we called it) was first introduced (1966) it was applied with a sticky adhesive that was activated by heat. The problem was when an open area like a wing was covered. It would wrinkle up like a prune in the summer heat. TF's cure was to apply silkspan tissue to the open areas only with dope and water shrink. TF later replaced the sticky adhesive with a dry heat activated adhesive and the problem went away. What they're doing now? Don't know but my last experience with MK was ok. Had to pull like a fool to prevent wrinkles. I still prefer silk or koverall and dope over MK though. Fabric and dope finishes add tensile strength to a structure where iron-on's like MK don't add as much.

deanwesterburg

I would think you can do some very scale things with the cloth such as pinking strips.

heli_Rod

Well, I am in the process of covering my latest project with Monokote. I have to agree that there is a difference between today's Monokote and what I used years ago. I am truly disappointed with the results. This stuff wrinkles when there is absolutely no reason for it to wrinkle. When it does wrinkle, getting them out is very difficult. I'm going to borrow a heat gun and see if that helps.

It's not likely that I will use Monokote again. To bad they had to change it.[]

Rod[&o]

heli_Rod

To give Monokote an honest evaluation, I bought a new heat gun and a trim iron. All I have ever used to cover with was a standard Monokote sealing iron, but it just wasn't getting the job done this time. No matter how I applied the covering, it always had wrinkles of some sort. It acted like it had a "grain". A combination of trim iron and heat gun removed about 99% of all the wrinkles. It took a lot of heat and I even melted one small hole while learning how to use the heat gun. The wrinkles had to be "worked" quite a bit to get them out, but the results were very good.

I have to retract my statement about not using Monokote again. I still like the looks of Monokote and now I know how to achieve premium results using new techniques.

I do believe it is harder to work with than it used to be. I also noticed that it has a stronger odor than it used to.

Rod

8178

My Feedback: (17)

I’ve seen a number of MonoKote threads on RCU, some positive and some negative. No mater what negative comments are made, overall MonoKote continues to be the best film covering available.

deanwesterburg

8178, would you like to offer some proof to that statement? Let's hear your likes/dislikes of other coverings.

ELTIGRE

I have used Monokote in the past but Oracover/ Ultra cote won me over years ago. thicker material that responds more predictably to heat, MUCH less bubbling adhesive& colors were flater satin instead of shiny. monkote has a grain direction that can be noticed when covering open ribbed wings. I have not had any problems with silver ultracote & use it extensively on sport scale stuff.

rcmiket

[quote8178, would you like to offer some proof to that statement? Let's hear your likes/dislikes of other coverings.
][/quote]

Got any "proof" what's this turning into the AMA Forum. I have to agree I have no problems with Monocoat. The more you use it the better you get at using it. Product's change over time we need to change with them...... more heat less heat whatever it takes to get the job done.
Mike

Jon.

I think the companies keeps the good stuff for there ARF's. It makes them look good.[:@] so when we try to cover our own planes and it doesn't work, we will say: I had enough!!!! Ill just go out and buy an arf kit that looks good.[&o]