-
Posts
-
The current survey is about all the manufacturers adopting the same warranty standard for solid surface material. The following is an example:
- Wilsonart – 4″ wide seam support with 45 degree bevel
- Corian – 2″ wide mnimum without bevel
- Staron – 4″ wide minimum with bevel
- Hi-Macs – 4″ wide minimum with bevel
The same is true with the corner blocks for the cooktop.
Wouldn’t it be beneficial for all the companies to come together and promote guality solid surface practices instead of all the companies having a little different method? Imagine if the computer industry had a different standard for connecting your digital camera to you computer.
I’ve been banging on the side of that soap box for a while now. Andy, this is a great step in bringing this industry together for the common good.
Avonite, 4″ wide seam block, no bevel and cooktop blocks 4″ no bevel.
One thing for all manufactures to think about, when competing against a corian fabricator, we will point out the need for “high strength cut outs” in the cooktop corners, where other brands do not require them. This raises a red flag suggesting, true or not, that corian products are more prone to cooktop cracking. I asked this of our staron salesman, since he said he was an ex corian guy. His reply was corian had more tops out there, thus a larger amount of claims for cooktop problems. Good point, but my point is that by doing something different, they open themselves up to critizism or attacks on their products properties whether factual or not.
On some of the granite sites, they use any and all “cracks” in the veneer of e-stone and solid surface info to attack both products. Honest? Fair? Got me, but they will compete the best they can and use what ever ammo they get their hands on. One thing some of the stoners seem to be pushing for is industry standards for quality, seams, ect, as a way to set the good shops above the “hackers”, as they call them.
My visit last week with the avonite rep brought up this very idea, a way to set companies apart based on quality and adherance to standards. It seems that conflict can and does occur when a large account has warrantee problems, getting them to do it right without losing the account. Standards set by an independent third party should help out.
Tom, are we re-inventing the wheel here? Has ISSFA already tried or done this?
Andy,
The materials are so much the same anymore, except maybe for the poly’s, you would think that the other guys would follow Corian like they all did at first. It used to be that if you had to do it with Corian the other guys would make you do it with their material as well, what happened? I thought Corian always had the best and most comprehensive R & D dept.
Shane
I would like to get all the manufacturers in the same room to talk about it. If there was support from the fabricators, it would make it a lot easier to get things moving. Maybe there is a reason for the difference. I am just not aware of them
It would be nice to know why so many differences exsist between companies. It is hard enough for me to remember the differences and to try and now at looking at training new people. The will look at you and say well why are they different and makes us look real good when all we can say is becouse they said so in the manual. Hope this process could get them to send out the good reasons or just set the same standards. If they want to make themselves different from the other guy just do it in colors or something like that, not the fabrication.
From what I understand ISSFA is coming out with a fabrication manual next year that will be embraced by all major manufacturer’s. The way it is going to be written is to follow the most rigid of requirements of all manu’s so that you will actually be over building on some material, not sure if I like the idea or not.
I like Andy’s Idea,
Get a representative from each manufacturer and some fabricator spokesmen together and work out an industry standard. If one manufacturer has a more productive and beneficial way to do a particular process, and can validate their research, I see no reason why the other guys would not agree to it. But I feel it would be necessary for fabricator involvement to insure that our interests are also considered. Boy, wouldn’t life be grand.
Shane
Norm W. wrote
From what I understand ISSFA is coming out with a fabrication manual next year that will be embraced by all major manufacturer’s. The way it is going to be written is to follow the most rigid of requirements of all manu’s so that you will actually be over building on some material, not sure if I like the idea or not.Norm,
No disrespect intended, but ISSFA has been telling their member that for over 6 years. Nothing has ever been done with it.
Warranty standard are a little easier to focus on.
Why don’t we come up with our own warranty standards that will satisfy all the manufacturers. So if you follow “The Fabricator Network” warranty standards, it will be as good or better than all the manufacturers. Everyone will be covered with one uniform standard.
Norm,
Andy’s got it right in saying that ISSFA has been on this since the get-go.
I’m not sure it’s all their fault, as it is ultimately the Manufacturers money going for these repairs. I can see the reluctance in trusting someone else’s standards.You know what would make this easier? No warranty.
Tom M
Tom, with all respect, no warrantee like “granite”? No doubt all posting here are busting their hump to make the best tops possible, how can we stand out among the hacks without warrantees?
Andy, Mory, please consider starting a committee to start a rough draft of the fabricator rules. I suggest that we definetly include a mix of small and large shops, some more experienced repair guys ( especially Tom and the back to perfection guy) and get this ball rolling! Once a rough draft is put online, lets all criticize and offer amendments, then submit it to the manufactures for approval. Allow the same amendments to be proposed from the manufactures, but let’s make them defend their positions.
We need to offer something in return for their trouble and risk. Can we back this with a professional board to help police the ranks? Maybe in return for an advanced, improved set of fabrication rules, a fabricator would get something to use in marketing as well as agreeing to cover problems not caused by material defects or risk losing standing with the group.
While writing this, nbc is running a dateline story on the power of the internet to get problems fixed for consumers. We are here at this point, apparently no one else is willing to do it, so lets do it. As I signed on today, there were 59 people on the site, 50 were visitors. Andy and Mory have given the good fabricators a chance to change the solid surface buisness, let’s not waste it.
I don’t have enough experience to lead the commitee, but count me in as your first volunteer.
Al,
I agree, a great product should have a warrantee to let people know we are not afraid to stand behind what we sell. I also agree that fabricator involvement is a good idea; after all it is to our advantage that the product does not fail. Our interest is to constantly better our fabrication methods to provide a better product to the end user. Word of mouth and customer loyalty is the best form of advertising we have.
Shane
Why don ‘t we see if we can’t get the fabrication/technical guys at each of the top 10 manufacturers to at least agree to talk about wether the uniform warranty idea may or may not work. If they are willing to at least listen, then we could pitch an idea to have uniform warranty rules apply to all solid surface material.
After tha we can try to get a uniform fabrication/installation techniques accomplished.
How does this sound?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.