Quote:

So Marq...

I'm leaning more towards the Brightside, but it's got me wondering.

If it covers with less coats... and it doesn't have to be "cut" to make it pliable. Why is everyone still going with the Rust-oleum? Why not just use the Brightside instead?

Is it cost only or stubborness maybe?





This thread began with Tremclad... because that is what Charger had experience working with.

We branched to include the Rustoleum paint because Tremclad was a Canadian based product and Rustoleum was the equivalent product in the United States ( 'almost the same' product ) as the company that produces both products is the same one.

I branched over to the Brightside because like a lot of people, I had my concerns about the long term viability of Tremclad/Rustoleum. Since they were basically an enamel paint, I thought that a polyurathane would give a slightly higher quality level of paint. After all... even in the automotive pro painting trade, the polyurathane paint jobs are the 'next level' up or more expensive type paint jobs you can get at the shop.

People may prefer to go with the Tremclad/Rustoleum route simply because of cost. Most of us walk into this whole 'roller painting' proposition with a bit of skeptism. And if we have a candidate that we might consider this route to go for painting, some folks might want to keep the bucks invested low - so that if the experiment blows up... there won't be a big financial cost to giving it a shot.

As well though, Charger and many other examples contributed here have proven that the Tremclad/Rustoleum paint jobs are viable. So folks are more than willing to give it a shot.

Those who take a shot using the Brightside paint have understood that there is a quality difference between an enamel paint job and a polyurthane paint job. They may also share a concern about the long term viability of the enamel paint job compared to the more hearty polyurathane. Like myself, they may have concluded that 'if' the marine or boat painters have been successfully doing these roller jobs on their boats - and the environmental concerns are similar for the boat owners, then they don't mind paying a few bucks more for the paint that they will be using.

So in some ways it boils down to a question of how much money some folks want to invest in their project... and in other cases it boils down to the psychological comfort level of the painter with the product they are going to use and the long term end result they are hoping for.

One other 'decision factor' might be the color range offered by the two groups of products. Someone might swing to Rustoleum simply because it is a better color match for what they want. They might have wanted to go with Brighside for the benefits of a polyurathane paint job... but if the color they want only is offered by the one manufacturer... then they will swing to that product.

Another decision factor that might come to play is simply a question of availability. Rustoleum/Tremclad can be found at a HUGE range and type of stores... whereas not everyone has easy local access to a Brightside dealer OR they may not wish to order it and have it shipped to them. I know for myself that I tend to prefer going to the store and grabbing the cans in my hot little hands rather than waiting for it to be shipped to me.

Dunno... those are some fast thoughts on the reason why some folks swing towards one product over another...

.