Page 1 of 1

Coe 96

Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 1:00 am
by Judy W
Is all spectrum glass coefficient 96?

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 9:11 am
by rosanna gusler
No. R.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 2:13 pm
by DonMcClennen
Glass made for kilnwork with the "96" label is formulated to resist devit. from multiple firings as well as consistent COE96 to aid compatibility. Regular stock Spectrum may or may not be in the 96 range but WILL devit. when heated.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 2:16 pm
by Judy W
Thank you for your responses.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:27 am
by Laurie Spray
There are many regular spectrum stained glass that play nice with 96 clear....test test test

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 2:32 pm
by AndyT
I've had pretty good success with non-fusible spectrum. the streakies and wispys usually will divit but I've found that capping them in clear eliminates that.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 3:31 pm
by Kevin Midgley
I've had not straight out of the kiln but some time later major cracking where Spectrum non system 96 touched each other.
The idea that the glass is from the one manufacturer so it won't matter is flawed. The devit is the least of the problems.
One must not forget the issues Bullseye went through when it started the compatible glass fusing business.
Some colours were stable for one firing and not two as they would change their COE during that firing process of time and temperature.
Now Bullseye claims their tested glass is good for 3 firings.

So as Lauri wrote you'd better be testing your glass for compatibility before firing it.
Paying the money and sticking with fusible Bullseye is much simpler and cheaper in the long run.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 2:58 pm
by AndyT
Kevin Midgley wrote:I've had not straight out of the kiln but some time later major cracking where Spectrum non system 96 touched each other.
The idea that the glass is from the one manufacturer so it won't matter is flawed. The devit is the least of the problems.
One must not forget the issues Bullseye went through when it started the compatible glass fusing business.
Some colours were stable for one firing and not two as they would change their COE during that firing process of time and temperature.
Now Bullseye claims their tested glass is good for 3 firings.

So as Lauri wrote you'd better be testing your glass for compatibility before firing it.
Paying the money and sticking with fusible Bullseye is much simpler and cheaper in the long run.
Why do you say BE is cheaper in the long run? I think spectrum 96 is actually more affordable.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:34 pm
by Kevin Midgley
Bullseye is cheaper in the long run because it sells faster.
Don't believe me?
Make two identical items with the 'same' colour and the Bullseye will sell first.
The Bullseye piece side by side with the 96 will be the one picked up first by a customer.
Why work with a harder to sell material?
Yes 96 is often priced lower but what does that mean to you if the piece cannot sell for as much money as one made with Bullseye?
Do the test and you too will become a believer in using Bullseye.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 6:57 pm
by Bert Weiss
Kevin Midgley wrote:Bullseye is cheaper in the long run because it sells faster.
Don't believe me?
Make two identical items with the 'same' colour and the Bullseye will sell first.
The Bullseye piece side by side with the 96 will be the one picked up first by a customer.
Why work with a harder to sell material?
Yes 96 is often priced lower but what does that mean to you if the piece cannot sell for as much money as one made with Bullseye?
Do the test and you too will become a believer in using Bullseye.
Brilliant Kevin. I like it. Bullseye is sold by the pound and Spectrum by the square foot. Consequently Spectrum runs a little thin. So, when you stack 2 layers, it doesn't always hit the magic 6mm threshold. This is especially true in the center of sheet.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:16 am
by Peter Angel
Kevin Midgley wrote:Bullseye is cheaper in the long run because it sells faster.
Don't believe me?
Make two identical items with the 'same' colour and the Bullseye will sell first.
The Bullseye piece side by side with the 96 will be the one picked up first by a customer.
Why work with a harder to sell material?
Yes 96 is often priced lower but what does that mean to you if the piece cannot sell for as much money as one made with Bullseye?
Do the test and you too will become a believer in using Bullseye.
Kevin, why does the bullseye sell better than the sys96?

Pete

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:42 am
by Kevin Midgley
Don't know why, it just does in my personal experience.
Try the 90 vs 96 test yourself and report back.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:57 am
by williamslaybaugh
It will be such a utopia when the glass world can move beyond the Coe illusion.

This is the same Spectrum glass that makes/made three different glass blowing nuggets that are not compatible with each other, yet all are technically 96 Coe. Here it is from there own website.

Spectrum Premium 2.0 Nuggets have a measurable expansion of 96 x 10 -7 in/inºC (0-300ºC), but are NOT compatible with System 96® products.

I'm not opposed to Spectrum glass and feel that Bullseye has some issues of their own. It's just that we as consumers have been taught to look at a small part of what makes glass compatible and are eagerly willing to accept it because that's all we know what to look for.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:10 pm
by Bert Weiss
williamslaybaugh wrote:It will be such a utopia when the glass world can move beyond the Coe illusion.

This is the same Spectrum glass that makes/made three different glass blowing nuggets that are not compatible with each other, yet all are technically 96 Coe. Here it is from there own website.

Spectrum Premium 2.0 Nuggets have a measurable expansion of 96 x 10 -7 in/inºC (0-300ºC), but are NOT compatible with System 96® products.

I'm not opposed to Spectrum glass and feel that Bullseye has some issues of their own. It's just that we as consumers have been taught to look at a small part of what makes glass compatible and are eagerly willing to accept it because that's all we know what to look for.
William, anybody who has been reading this board over the past decade, would know that COE is only one part of the compatibility paradigm. You would also know that nuggets go through compatibility shifts after they are melted, so before melting, they may not be compatible with System 96 glasses. After melting, they should be compatible. Many blowers use 96 colors with their clear furnace crystal made from the nuggets. Nuggets don't work for pate de verre before re-smelting.

Re: Coe 96

Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2014 4:37 am
by williamslaybaugh
Burt that was my point they should be compatible after melting but they're not. Their first batch of nuggets were compatible with their sheet glass but where very corrosive to electric furnace elements and refractory. They reformulated them as premium nuggets to correct this issue, but ended up making a glass that was incompatible with almost all other studio glass. They have recently released an updated version premium nuggets 2.0, which is very close to spruce pine. Both are 96 Coe and both have questionable compatibility with system 96 sheet glass. Hence the warning from Spectrum and my rant that there needs to be a more accurate way of labeling compatibility than a generic 96 or 90 because "should be" is not all that helpful is it.