[Travlin]

I don't fault you or anyone else for wanting to learn more or for questioning some of the conventional wisdom on this forum. I just think you have to have realistic expectations.

Frankly, I doubt any RV manufacturer can fully justify the reasons they use the materials they use (in fact, I think many of us amateurs and hobbyists probably do a better, more thorough job than the commercial guys). I seriously doubt that have any robust scientific studies or research to that end.

Maybe some of us here could be a little more forthcoming and a little less... zealous... in our defense of why we promote certain strategies. Something as simple as "I drove the van around before filling the channels, then drove around after, and it seemed much more quiet" is probably as good as we can get, rather than asking if said person did any controlled analysis, data gathering, and considered every possible scientific angle before making such a bold proclamation. I mean... of course not. How deep into the weeds are we really going to get?

It reminds me somewhat of one of my other hobbies - audiophile sound. You want to talk about crazy... start following true audiophiles in search of obtaining the absolute best possible sound quality you can get.

That is all well and good for the builders. However, when someone selling a product makes statements indicating a "benefit" I will expect that they have some supporting information, rather than the run-of-the-mill things you have stated the rest of us most often use to explain our choices.

There is a marked difference between people stating an opinion when they have no dog in the hunt, and those stating one who do.

When someone selling a product repeatedly makes a statement about "the benefit being well worth the trouble," and, will sell more of their product in order to fill those cavities, they should be able to offer some supporting data. Regardless of whether the intent of the statement is profit-based, or, they're only trying to do right by their customer based upon their understanding, or possibly misunderstanding. I don't think it is unreasonable to ask for more detail in such an instance.

When such questions have repeatedly been left only vaguely addressed across several threads, and I still want to know, I use the forum to ask a broader cross-section of people if they have anything to add.

More than a few of the folks who contribute here have done testing, found a better way, or somehow determined with a higher degree of accuracy than mere opinion on what does and does not work. This is a valuable resource of folks willing to share their experience and expertise with the rest of us. It seemed the right place to approach the matter in a way that would clear things up.

Which, in the long run, is what happened, but more because of the lack of supporting data than what I had hoped for.

Your comment about manufacturers is spot on. Most simply rely on time tested building principles, and there is no need to do a lot of R&D if they are using the same materials and techniques that have proven themselves over time.

This tack away from the usual methods is exactly what raised the question for me. Standard building methods indicate you insulate around thermal and acoustic bridges, not inside them.

When an answer is presented that alludes to there being some valid reason for doing something a certain way I will always presume there might be more to the story. Ask and you shall receive, right? It is a way to separate the wheat from the chaff and turn up any data that might be more useful than feel-good opinions. No, I don't "expect" everyone to have done testing, and yet, I'm never surprised when I find that someone has.

This time was an outlier for me. It didn't result in any feedback that demonstrated a benefit based in function. Usually queries will quickly result in a valid reason for doing something a certain way and we move along.

This thread was most remarkable to me in how that didn't happen.

 

[Anchorless]

Meh. I've always viewed Hein as an van enthusiast with loads of experience who builds some pretty niche and cool things, and sells Thinsulate on the side. His "information" being the product of his own research and experience, and not as some industry snake oil salesperson making a killing on us poor gullible amateur van consumers. I just never took it that seriously. Of course he wants to sell Thinsulate; I seriously doubt he's making enough from it to justify misrepresenting the effects of the stuff. I still don't see what the big deal is here.

When I was looking at insulating my van, I made a list of the materials I could use to insulate, came up with a list of reasonable expectations and a budget, and did my own research significantly based on the experience of other van users, all the while realizing that given the situation, the differences between the different materials are probably pretty small and trivial. I liked that Thinsulate is purportedly more "hydrophobic" than some materials, easier to work with than other materials, and generally less toxic than yet some others.

It never bothered me that Hein was peddling the stuff, nor did his representations influence my decision to buy Thinsulate from him more than what common sense and an open mind to the discussions on this forum in that regard would provide. I found most of what he said about it and insulation in general to be coming from a genuine interest in trying to figure out better practices and methods with the community rather than pecuniary motivation. Ultimately, we all just want to go camp a bit more comfortably, and not waste a bunch of time and money doing so.

I think its great that other people question these practices and try new and different things; it does no good for this forum to be an echo chamber on how to build a van. I don't even mind wanting more substantial data if its out there and others have read it. I just think your expectations are a big exaggerated. But if it matters to you that much maybe you should conduct your own (objective) research and you can put your and these questions to rest.

Meanwhile, I just back from a great week in Moab with my partially insulated (and no wall-coverings) van and we didn't absolutely freeze. Just kind of.

 

[Travlin]

I just think your expectations are a big exaggerated. But if it matters to you that much maybe you should conduct your own (objective) research and you can put your and these questions to rest.

The reference to "expectations" leaves me scratching my head. I "expected" to find that I had overlooked something.

Someone said there were benefits and I asked what the benefits are. Basic logic indicated to me that the answers didn't fit the parameters involved, and, they kept being repeated without further explanation. I just wanted to clear up things by addressing the known facts and see if my logic was sound.

My own research on acoustic damping for the Transit Cargo Van, covered in my build thread, did play a part in both raising and putting these questions to rest.

 

[Truck]

I think it's flippin fantastic Hein is selling the SM600L. Where else are you going to get it?

There are tradeoffs to everything but I know for dang sure I didn't want to breathe fiberglass particulate 100% of my van life. I loved removing that stuff! It made me feel great. And I know the fiberglass will do great in my static garage environment and provide great comfort for my renters when I go full time van.

 

[ranxerox]

lots of luck, it is not even rated for thermal applications:

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company...products/~/3M-Thinsulate-Acoustic-Insulation-SM600L?N=5002385+3292659035&rt=rud

 

[gypsy brewer]

lots of luck, it is not even rated for thermal applications:

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company...products/~/3M-Thinsulate-Acoustic-Insulation-SM600L?N=5002385+3292659035&rt=rud

Last June I contacted 3M directly and asked if there is a calculated R-value measure of thermal resistance for 3M Thinsulate SM600L. A Senior Application Engineer from their Automotive and Aerospace Solutions Division replied stating, "The R value of SM600L is 5.2 ft2hr˚F/BTU."

 

[Eiko]

I know for dang sure I didn't want to breathe fiberglass particulate 100% of my van life.

This is one thing that is known with data to back it up. Don't use fiberglass. It was known 25 years ago in this study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1012147/ You may say you are not a fiberglass factory worker and not exposed as much as they are. But the study used chest xrays to determine if the workers got pneumoconiosis. Chest x-rays are at least 10-100 times (pulling numbers out of my ass) less sensitive than a CT scan so if they had used CT scans, their results could have been that 80% of workers had lung abnormalities.

Not being able to breathe is not a good way to die. Not to mention all of this increases your risk for lung/pleural cancers.

I was very surprised to see that one picture someone posted recently of an upfitter (Quigley?) using fiberglass.

 

[Travlin]

lots of luck, it is not even rated for thermal applications:

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company...products/~/3M-Thinsulate-Acoustic-Insulation-SM600L?N=5002385+3292659035&rt=rud

This document shows the R-value.
http://solutions.3m.com.br/3MConten...1288034812000&assetId=1273670275447&assetType=MMM_Image&blobAttribute=ImageFile

 

[ranxerox]

cool! maybe on the next build.
the current one is a half inch of foil backed Rmax polyiso, one inch of blue styrofoam board between 2x2 studs with half inch cedar T&G covering all steel on the walls and ceiling as well as the same amount in the floor.

 

[Michael Ophus]

my autism sometimes causes me to be a little rough around the edges, well maybe not sometimes probably all the time, but i do try hard to be a nicer person in other peoples eyes.
other people here the last few days have done a better job of saying what i have always thought since my first days of reading this forum but i never knew how to put it into words.

stuffing insulation in all of the voids of the van is like stuffing mud (chinking) in the cracks between the logs in a log cabin, just because you stopped the wind from blowing between the logs does not mean the cabin will be warm! this has been painfully obvious to me from the beginning and would be obvious to anyone i know in life. i could not believe so many on this forum embraced this idea and that it was all they needed to do!
but we each live in our own small worlds which often seem to be very big to each of us.
but what is obvious in my world may not be obvious in other peoples worlds. (then add in advertising hype which many here seem to believe even though there are few facts to back it up.)

plus 2 summers of reading of people complaining (crying would be my choice of words) of how inadequate the transit AC is when i know that with out a doubt with proper insulation (no uninsulated exposed steel.) the front mounted AC will do a great job of cooling the whole van.

all of this leads to frustration on my part because many people here just want to be told what to do, whether it is right or wrong, and if it turns out to be wrong then they later complain loudly and blame it on everything else!
then the troll in me attacks, and i love a good troll! (you brought it upon yourself!) - i do not want to be a troll, i hate trolls! the trolls judged me harshly when i was a child because i was a little different then everybody else. idk? what goes around comes around? all i can say is i try hard to be a better person every day even if some days i am not.

 

[GracieUnicorn]

stuffing insulation in all of the voids of the van is like stuffing mud (chinking) in the cracks between the logs in a log cabin, just because you stopped the wind from blowing between the logs does not mean the cabin will be warm! this has been painfully obvious to me from the beginning and would be obvious to anyone i know in life. i could not believe so many on this forum embraced this idea and that it was all they needed to do!
.

I think the thing that's being left out of this equation, is whether an auxiliary heating source is being used. If you have something that creates heat, you can stay warm in a tent. I realize many van converters plan to boondock, so insulation would be essential. But some of us will utilize an electric hookup and heater - so since our vans are already chinked, we'll stay warm enough ;-)

 

[Eiko]

@Michael Ophus - that was a brave reveal of your true self. Thank you for that. Hopefully, others here will better understand some of the comments you make. And may or may not give you some slack.

RE: AC and you may not have been referring to me - I did not complain about inability to keep a huge uninsulated van cool. I complained that the temperature of the air coming out of the vent was warm (like 55 deg on a 70 deg day). It's now December, I have no longer have complaints about the AC.

 

[surfvan]

I've been following this whole debate, and since I'm about to put in the insulation, I've been wondering why no one mentions that nearly the entire inner structure of the van is separated by about a quarter inch of foam glue which breaks the thermal bridge that is at the core of this discussion. Be civil now, I'm just asking.

 

[Hein]

I've been following this whole debate, and since I'm about to put in the insulation, I've been wondering why no one mentions that nearly the entire inner structure of the van is separated by about a quarter inch of foam glue which breaks the thermal bridge that is at the core of this discussion. Be civil now, I'm just asking.

I did mention that on page 2: http://www.fordtransitusaforum.com/...-vans-conversions/57425-filling-small-channels-insulation-why-2.html#post755825

Regarding conduction/thermal bridging...

Please recall that most van skins are bonded to the structure with reasonably thick beads of (foaming) adhesive.

There is actually no welding between outer skin and structure so a pretty good thermal break to begin with.

 

[Travlin]

I've been following this whole debate, and since I'm about to put in the insulation, I've been wondering why no one mentions that nearly the entire inner structure of the van is separated by about a quarter inch of foam glue which breaks the thermal bridge that is at the core of this discussion. Be civil now, I'm just asking.

I've seen that too. My guess is that adhesive is used in places where welding would deform the exterior metal during manufacture and is the method with the optimal balance of low cost and effective structural support for Ford's engineers.

It probably does lend itself nicely toward isolating parts of the pillars from both thermal and acoustic loads. Other places on the pillar that are welded and can bridge to the outside panels will carry heat and sound between the inside and outside across the entire surface of the pillar if it is not isolated from interior air. Uninsulated air spaces at those points can also allow for thermal loads to transfer between inside and the exterior panels.

Here's a photo for some idea of the areas that are carrying heat to the cold outside panels on Antoine's van that might lead to clues about where to focus efforts.

Notice where the B, C, and D-Pillars are located. No condensation exists on most of their length, meaning the pillar is carrying heat from inside to outside. From what I read on their website related to this build Thinsulate was installed in some, if not each of those channels. Antoine eventually used EZ-Cool to cover the remaining exposed metal facing the living space in order to break the bridge. This photo is what led me to question the effectiveness of filling those voids. Relying upon there being a good thermal break between those surfaces may not be an accurate assessment in practice.
​

Looking at the big picture of an overall build it seems most effective to plan on placing some barrier to isolate thermal and acoustic transfer between as much of the metal structure and the living space as is reasonable, while still meeting any particular builder's design needs.

Even a small layer of fabric or indoor/outdoor carpet are reported to make a worthwhile difference on those places where putting insulation doesn't work with the builder's design goals.

 

[Hein]

Below is a photo (taken 10/2013) of our Sprinter after I insulated the upper walls with all cavities filled.
Note the lack of thermal bridging effect in those areas. The lower walls have no insulation yet at all.

The swirl marks along the top are from the previous day's wax job.

Photo of the other side on a different day. Again, Upper walls and doors are insulated but lower walls not yet.

 

[Travlin]

Hein,

Was this vehicle being lived in (heated inside) on a cold morning? If so, do you recall the temperatures involved?

A photo taken of a van parked outside without any significant difference between inside and outside temperatures would have condensation all over. There would be no heat source in such a scenario to be bridged to the outside and prevent condensation.

Antoine's was taken on a cold morning after their spending the night in it with the heater running. The heat escaping to the panels raised their temperature to exceed the dew point and prevented condensation from forming.
"It was a cold and damp morning (37F) and we were heating the van with the Webasto heater (55F)."

Thanks!

 

[Hein]

The van had a 750 watt space heater running and around 55-60 degrees F inside. We can get it warmed to about 30F degrees over outside ambient temp with that much heat. It has a very throrough Thinsulate(TM) / Low-E sandwich insulation system. No effort was made to mitigate thermal bridging. The body adhesive in the Sprinter is a solid urethane so probably a little more conductive than the foamed adhesive used in the Transit.

 

[Travlin]

The van had a 750 watt space heater running and around 55-60 degrees F inside. We can get it warmed to about 30F degrees over outside ambient temp with that much heat. It has a very throrough Thinsulate(TM) / Low-E sandwich insulation system. No effort was made to mitigate thermal bridging. The body adhesive in the Sprinter is a solid urethane so probably a little more conductive than the foamed adhesive used in the Transit.

Was there any chassis metal inside exposed to the interior temperatures the way it was on Antoine's van?

Edit:
I may have answered my own question.

Is this the interior of the van in the photo above?

If so, notice how it has an interior like what I describe, where the inner-facing side of these channels' thermal bridges are covered. Thus, preventing exposure to the interior air space and subsequent heat loss to the outside panels through that bridge.

This factor explains the difference between Antoine's and Hein's van photos under similar conditions. They both have filled channels, but only Hein's is without hot spots on the exterior where those channels are located because the thermal bridging was mitigated with the interior panels. If there is nothing insulating the inside-facing side of the channels (like EZ-Cool, automotive felt, etc.) this also exemplifies how much of a difference just covering them with a panel can make.

A very nice van interior, BTW. I remember reading that thread when I was considering a Sprinter. I loved the Grill you created storage for in the spare tire.

 

[Hein]

I wasn't finished insulating so no wall panels in place and the metal frame around windows is exposed (still). So none of the wall panels shown in the photo you found. Probably had some ceiling panels back in at that point. Below is a photo of the interior at the time of the first photo.

Have you ever seen Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition skits? (lol)

https://youtu.be/Nf_Y4MbUCLY

Thanks for the compliment on our grill storage.