Hi, will resin bonded last on a driveway with a turning circle where 3 point turns, etc. are done on it? It is a large tarmac drive that is looking its age so I would like to re-surface it. I had a guy out to quote for a resin bounded install, but was a lot more than I wanted to spend due to the size of the drive. I understand that bonded would be much cheaper, but will it last? The guy that was out said it wouldn't, but i don't know if that was because he wanted to sell me a bound drive and didn't know much about bonded. Thanks for any advice.
In theory you shouldn't have a problem with either surface if your moving and turning your steering wheel and not DRY STEERING. However that can be difficult in tight 3 point turns. resin bonded was ordinally designed for highways as a anti-skid surface so the surface has texture and if any heer the aggregate will pluck out. most of us installers on here would direct customers towards resin bounded {we stopped installing bonded resin around 6 years ago} bound is more aesthetically pleasing but will be much more expensive hope this helps
Hi Tim, We are a manufacturer of both system types and as such we have an unbiased view. As you have already suggested, the margin on bound systems is greater than that of bonded systems which will inevitably lead to a general push for customers to have a bound system. The question as to if a bonded system will last isn’t simple as it ultimately depends on the product being used. It is true to say that many two component, urethane bonded systems perform poorly but it is also true to say that many poorly formulated or poorly installed bound systems will also perform poorly. I can say without doubt, our resin bonded product (which is NOT the standard two part, urethane) will significantly outperform ANY bound system. In fact, our bonded system passes the Highways Agency (BBA HAPAS certified) scuffing test to Type 1 with an erosion index of zero (0 best, 30 worst) and is used on motorway slip roads with a 25 year guarantee. When a good system is installed by a good installer, both bound and bonded systems are ideal for a driveway installation. This page of our website covers the difference between resin bound and resin bonded: https://www.staruretech.com/resin-surfacing There are good resin bound and good resin bonded systems. My advice is that any resin bound system should be a two part, aliphatic (UV resistant) product and any resin bonded system should be a three part, urea product. Any bound or bonded system is only as good as the specific product or installation. I hope this helps.
Really nice answer Mark but we're sticking with bound for driveways I think it's safe to say they are quite different surfaces and as long as the customer understands the end result and is happy that is all that matters. The aesthetics are quite different. Resin bound is permeable, resin bonded isn't. Resin bonded does provide excellent slip resistance if that is important for the specific project
Thanks Mark, how do I find an installer that uses your products (I'm in Hampshire)? I have around 200 sq. meters to cover and the first quote I got for resin bound is way more than I want to spend. So looking for any alternatives.
I agree Alan and we very much see bound and bonded installers as different customers. It is a little frustrating to see generalised negatives regarding bonded surfacing. Comparing the performance of a two part bonded system to our three part system is the same as ignoring UV and non-UV bound systems and implying all bound surfacing is the same. As a manufacturer of both systems, I think that bound surfacing provides a more aesthetic appearance with a lot more colour options whilst bonded surfacing has price benefits (for the customer) and a more natural look. It really should come down to specifying the right type of product for each specific installation as some installs shouldn’t be bound, some shouldn’t be bonded and some shouldn’t be either. Regarding the permeability I agree that this should be a massive positive... but it all too often isn’t. Whilst resin bounds permeability should be its biggest significant benefit over almost all alternative systems, it is often used in very misleading marketing which ultimately reduces the bound systems credibility. Without the correct base, a products permeability can actually be a disadvantage likely to increase its chance of failing due to standing, trapped and freezing water. Despite what many suppliers claim, permeability does not imply SUDs compliance and a surface does not need to be permeable to be part of a SUDs compliant installation. Both bound and bonded systems can be part of a SUDs compliant installation. Even if the surface is permeable, on most overlays and non-porous bases it is unlikely to be part of a SUDs complaint installation. There are still far too many bound installs sold as permeable and SUDs compliant but which are neither. I have been just as guilty as some (not most) in this area. I think in an ideal world bound systems used for full installs and those used for overlays should be marketed as different systems with different benefits (and negatives) to ensure transparency? Probably not.
