Huh, never seen that before. Are you sure triple thick was used, or possibly something else?

I've been using superglue on lifting paint, then spraying triple thick over everything after that. It seems to hold.

Ouch. : \

I've heard many people say about this also. But, I can say I personally used Triple Think on several flaking backglasses. This was done over 15 years ago. All were stored in an unheated detached garage for about 10 years. I'm in the mid north so they have been in minus 0 degree winters and have been in 100+ degree summers. The garage also had water leaking during rainy periods. I use the rule of putting 3 light coats on. Not a heavy single coat. Not sure if that help. Anyway, they are all just as good as they were the day I sealed them. My recommendation would be to use thin "dry" coats not thick wet coats.

Same here. I don't ever use heavy wet coats. Just a couple light ones. The first glass I sprayed was a little over 10 years ago. Still looks the same today as it did then. Granted, I've never kept them in extreme conditions, but still.

You know that cab is beautiful just the way it is

The thicker the TTCCG coat the sooner "microcracks" form with potential coating flake and will require another respray to seal.

If you watch the temperature changes you can anticipate when action is required. I generally recoat certain glasses every 5 years. I only coat those that were susceptible to damage, not those perfect condition.

I have never lost or had a glass further damaged in nearly 30 years with an application.

However, I do not overspray, or place coating on trim which is carefully masked, which can promote paint lifting as a tear surface.

I am of the same belief as O-din when it comes to triple thick use, seen to many wrecks like that shown in this thread. I will say this however, I know without doubt that all of the Bg's I've seen showing damage were heavily coated; which for me, opens the possibility it's an application problem rather than a product problem. Either way I really would rather stay away from it altogether. I just recently expressed my feelings on this to you BlackKnight in a pm. Thx once again for your thoughtful help.

The curious thing is, if the triple thick was sprayed over the whole surface, and the assumption is being made that the triple thick caused the separation to be worse, then why is it not separating all over? When the separation is localized to the edges of the glass, then it seems to me that the root cause is moisture (or Windex) seeping in between the layers rather than thermal expansion mismatch. Sure, it "might" contribute to the stress... but is probably not the root cause of the problem. People allowing Windex to run down and pool in the lift channel is probably the worst case scenario.

I'm thinking that using some type of "sealer" just along the edges might be the best prevention rather than a full surface spray for a glass that is not flaking. If the glass is already flaking, then you need something to grab the flakes and keep them from falling off. Not much to loose at that point.

Triple thick works amazingly well - but as others have already said - several light coats is the way to go. I only use it on glasses where minor flaking has begun as it can be used to re-adhere flakes and lock in loose ones.

But regardless of whether a glass is sealed or not, try and keep the temp/humidity fluctuations to a minimum as this is the real enemy of a backglass. I know some people are old school, but incandescent lights are a disaster for backglasses - heating the backside of a glass while the front side is at room temp is just asking for trouble.

Triple Thick needs to get between the glass and the artwork to provide any adhesion. The problem is when you spray it under the artwork it blows it off the glass.

If people are allowing any type of fluids to seep into backglass lift channels that are responsible for their own problems. This promotes ferrous oxide that eats the coating and lifts the ink screening, not just exclusively from moisture delamination.

Any type of of significant delamination requires a full backglass coating not a partial. For spots, less than a half dollar, you can use a foam brush.
The key to protection of backglasses is proactivity, you can arrest damage long before it gets out of control.
However, as most know, once damage occurs significantly, it is permanent, and hard to repair.
Don't dismiss small areas as "it will not be a problem", or an owner will be surprised the following year.

Seems like temperature is a key variable.

Also if you don't triple thick this can happen.....

I don't triple thick mint glasses though.

Got one that was done in 1991 and it is 100% fine.

SDC12248 (resized).JPG

I wonder if maybe a window screen during application might help?

Don't see much use in applying anything unless the ink has already delaminated and the fluid can get between the ink and glass and act as an adhesive. Then you need something (plastic wrap?) to hold pressure until it cures...

As o-din mentioned get out a standard magnifying glass and inspect periodically, you do not want to be surprised.
It is best to evaluate backglasses once a year just like changing batteries in SS machines, even if the backglass is in a climate controlled environment.
The small amount of effort is worth protection in itself.
Especially after a collector has a large volume of stocked glasses.
I pull them from my storage racks, check and test, and slide them back in place, or open the boxes for visual inspection.

If people wonder why reproduction backglasses are shipped with a special coated "paper" (such as CPR), this is to prevent damage not only due to scratching, but ink screening sticking to other types of materials that are used for storage purposes, and is resistant to moisture.
Brown paper is not optimal, as even hints of moisture can cause the screening to stick to the glass and cause disasters. Most certainly DO NOT wedge backglasses in cardboard, and always keep them UPRIGHT in storage.

I try to Triple Think everything before I post now, especially since the threat of the purge and the "why do I have to be nice thread."

Seriously, I've used Triple Thick on a ton of backglasses. Some I coated heavy enough that the back looked like glass, and some with light coats as arcademojo, mbaumle and others said above. Never had an issue either way. Like also said though, I have always made sure my glasses are kept or stored in temp-controlled areas, never subject to extreme low, high or drastic temperature changes. Temperature is definitely a backglasses' worst enemy, at least from my experience. Older Bally and Gottlieb SS games seem to hold up better than Williams SS games like Gorgar, Pharaoh and Alien Poker. Not sure if their screening process was different back in those days.

I did try to use another "clear coat" spray at some point, and I remember that gave me a very uneven, flaky and patchy result with a light coating. Almost felt grainy or chalky.

And this is a definite. Even for those "old school" folks, they do make warm white LED's that look exactly like incandescents, but use a fraction of the energy and don't heat up anywhere near as much as regular incan bulbs. We carry them, as do other distros. The original incan bulbs are definitely a persistent enemy for backglasses and plastics. I always recommend changing at least the backbox to warm LED's, especially on EM's because the bulbs are generally more proximal to the backside glass surface. 4SMD no dome bulbs work great, give off a ton of light and often illuminate more of the backglass than the original bulbs did (unless it's a wedgehead - the choice of spots of illumination on many of those is just odd with most of the glass not being able to be illuminated without adding additional lamp sockets).

And never, ever, use quadruple thick!

exclusive-plain-glass-sheet-250x250 (resized).jpg

I don't use anything unless I get a glass that is starting to loose paint then I'll use Crystal Clear the regular stuff not the Tripple thick. A misting coat then another light misting coat is all it takes. The think coats are what pulls the ink off because the TT expands and contracts differently than the ink. A light coat of just the Crystal Clear doesn't have enough to pull and push with the changing climate and temp conditions.

I don't like using the stuff. It stinks, it's hard to work with, and it can cause more lost paint due to flaking. It's also unpredictable - I've had results like the OP after time and it's the main reason I stopped using the stuff.

For me, I just use mylar. Why the hell not? It's much easier to work with, you can cut to size, and the results are every bit as good as the best spray jobs. I don't see why more people aren't into it.

Are we afraid it's gonna age poorly and curl up in 30 years? Really?

Not my problem, and fact is after 30 years having a ball roll on it playfield mylar isn't in THAT bad of shape - and a backglass will never have any kind of contact with anything. I'm sure in 30 years a mylared backglass will be just fine.

The OP's backglass is also a prime example of ain't broke don't fix it. That backglass looked perfect!!! Why mess with it at all? If it was starting to flake slightly I'd just cover the affected areas with small patches of mylar.

Another unfortunate aspect of backglasses is the multitude of methods used to compress and screen the ink, not to mention the ink in itself. Some inks such as late EM Bally were heat stabilized with high temperature baking similiar to what is done with modern clear coats. Others were "cold" transfers and left to dry. A glass that was not fully cleaned prior to transfer or dust also contributes over time.
The factories were not high technology "clean stations".
Rust can also grow on the trim and spread on the glass, although this takes a long time.
Once you add an additional coating to a glass, if you do not know how it reacts, bad things can happen.

In the case of your Heat Wave, I have a very hard time believing if the glass was sealed with TTCCG that 5 months later in your house the backglass bubbled. My suspicion is he used some other product.
I have seen people use all sort of coatings, and some are just disasters.
Things such as varathanes EAT PAINT, dissolve coatings, and others with oils cause delamination even if clear in color.

The backglass construction process was never synonymous across the industry from 1950-1999 either.

AGC for example used a combined vinyl protective surface BEHIND the ink screening and mirroring for added durability.
It worked quite well, except when left under periods of extreme temperature change which caused "spiderwebbing".
Zaccaria had periods of pure plastic, not just actual backglasses (some 3D extrusions as well) but ink prints were prone to fade.

In fact, Bally changed their process in 1977, which resulted in what you see regards to flaking and full on surface delamination with most early SS Bally games starting with titles such as Paragon and Lost World.

Most of today's "modern backglasses" (not accurate reproductions) are simply vinyl adhesive transfers, applied with heat, cheap and effective, but not the same quality. BGResto has at least perfected this part of the process, but not being able to reproduce any form of mirroring on the backglass.

An owner can vacuum heat seal a backglass using a polymer coating which permanently protects a backglass, and does not prevent transparency (although the lighting is a bit more opaque), but it is expensive at over $300 a backglass.

It does have a shine on the dark out layer. It has been sprayed with something. Triple thick on a Gottlieb backglass makes the dark out layer slightly darker, and super shiny.

Wish we knew for sure what was used...either way, really sucks considering how nice your BG looked before problem started.

Got a bally playboy with a pretty nice playfield a few years ago... guy said he coated the playfield to protect it because it was so nice, but couldnt remember what he used....Great!...except I think Orbitor 1 has a smoother playfield

As mylar is essentially vinyl or plastic, don't you ever have problems with bubbling or melting from the heat of the bulbs in the backbox, particularly if games are frequently left on for a long periods of time?

Here is another example of why novices and sometimes even operators should not coat pinball items, if they do not know what they are doing.
It simply is not always recommended, and can be destructive, even if just for aesthetics.

In this case, this is a 4MBC taken from my archives (the final game of a "trio" that was bought out of an estate sale) that was coated with a clear polyurethane using a horsehair brush to "protect" the playfield.
It turned out REALLY BAD, and was essentially ruined because it cannot be easily removed without taking the paint on the playfield with it.
Since it has been on the playfield for so long, sanding would be really tricky but not impossible.
Fortunately, it did not yellow as well.

Prior to the coating the playfield was in excellent condition especially considering the age of the game.
The only significant wear were spots around the pop bumpers and shooter lane.

00K0K_cR90k6FDsoD_1200x900 (resized).jpg

Not once. And if that's an issue just use LEDs in the backglass which everybody who is concerned about harming their backglass does anyway.

I have used plain old polyurethane for 20 years. Usually minwax but any brand will do. I apply it with a foam brush so i can cut in the clear areas. If the paint is loose, I don't brush it on. I just let it drip from about 1/4" away and spread naturally over the damaged area, like pancake syrup.
I have never seen any ill effects from the urethane in all these years whether woodrails, ems, or the latest dot matrix. I never seal glasses which are perfect to start with - only glasses with some flaking or thinning paint.
Having heard horror stories about triple thick, I'll stay with my proven polyurethane.

Here is a beauty. Mac-Tac privacy Mylar. It is not noticeable from the front. Someone did this in the 80s.
DSCN0922 (resized).JPG

Hate those foggy score reel windows. Not a fan at all of triple thick.

Very first time I used trip thick, I did a friends ms. Pac bezel...it was blurry and horrible; I felt shitty as hell about it and spent forever getting it scrubbed of the clear portion of the glass...

Since then, I simply mask all the clear glass areas/score windows and everything is Zen...happy little clam; never had a problem with trip thick over many years myself.

Doesn't mean others are as lucky, I just havent seen it. Lots of different products out there...sucks when you don't know what was used previously :/

Take a flat blade xacto knife or razor blade, and an owner can remove the triple thick.
I prefer a flat xacto for precise control.
It takes roughly 15-30 minutes per window of effort and time.
An owner can use blue painters tape on the glass as a guide around the windows AFTER the backglass is coated if an owner has unsteady hands, but DO NOT do so before the coating is applied, or a disaster will most likely result.

Alternatively, you can mask the score windows before spraying, but this is a bit more tricky, but does save work time.
There is masking tape that is almost the right width size as the windows, but do not overlap the credit decal!

With care, the backglass remains undamaged, and the rest of the backglass remains sealed.
If an backglass does have delamination and an owner does nothing, the damage will spread until ink screening fully cracks.

All score, ball in play, and credit windows are now clear.
However, keep in mind that by destroying the integrity of the full coating, over time this can promote microcracks around the edges of the areas where the coating was removed or not applied, thereby increasing the chance that ink screening can lift in these areas, but it will take some time for this to occur, unless the glass is in a extreme temperature environment.

You have to judge the condition of ANY backglass prior to application of either TTCCG or a clear acrylic water based sealer.
As stated by others and myself, I do not recommend coating pristine glasses, or brand new reproductions.
BGResto reproductions will most likely never need to be coated in the next 20 years due to modern materials and process of creation.

For another example backglass, Seawitch (Stern, 1980) for reference from my collection archive:

Does this glass has a TTCCG coating?
Is there is cracking on the ink screening?
Is there other types of damage present?
Is there paint loss?
If damage occurred, how did it happen?
Were the score windows coated and removed afterwords, never, or before?
Were any repairs conducted to the glass?

This is an original glass, not a reproduction.
Therefore no trickery, and no Photoshop.
The reason I cannot show the back is that would make it easier to see if something was done or maybe not...

I will give the answer in a few days.

16992394_424407581235111_6759938565321463164_o.jpg

I frequently cut out little squares if thin poster board (miller high life divider sheet between layers of cans is cool. Lol) and set on windows with a small stack of pennies or a couple nickels. It masks window pretty well if cut to correct size; and picks back up easy without worrying about peeling the clear like tape might.

I guess I need to start Triple "reading" along with Triple thinking before the great purge!!!!

I'm interested in what you show with your Seawitch back glass. Mine has many tiny blisters in the yellow area behind the skull on righthand side. The blisters are between the glass and the ink/paint; I don't see where any kind of coating will help, or arrest this type of deterioration. Other than this one area the back glass in in nice shape.

Here is the results to the inquisitive question.
This is the backside of the Seawitch backglass, as I received it.

Does this glass has a TTCCG coating? Yes
Did it require a coating or preventative action? Yes
Is there is cracking on the ink screening? Yes
Is there other types of damage present? Yes, scrapes from poor handling during its lifetime
Is there paint loss? Yes, at the separation areas
If damage occurred, how did it happen? Ink screening separation due to age and heat
Were the score windows coated and removed afterwords, never, or before? Never, overcoated with "double shot" of the entire glass
Were any repairs conducted to the glass? Not at this time

The important point here is triple thick SAVED this backglass from further damage, when applied properly.
It would have continued to spread, if I had not taken action, possibly starting the glass to vein (aka blisters) as well.
As time progresses, this backglass is now become a "time capsule" as the damage has been completely arrested.

Use the product, when needed, but do not "over apply".

The cross coating was applied several years ago, and has remained in general relative temperature environment.
Restoration is possible to use this backglass in a game now, but unlikely I will do so, as reproductions are available.
Score coating removal is possible with careful effort, but unecessary.

The backglass damage is not noticeable unless lit from behind, and nearly invisible with a black filter installed.
Perhaps someday, I will be known as "Mr. Backglass" instead of TBK, but I still have many backglasses left to acquire on my list.
One backglass at a time...

Backside.jpg

7d4b7ccd7a959be5aa50628fa4708e8f1bb3b1e4.jpg

If your interested in a Seawitch replacement contact me.

John,

I know you did good work on this replacement, I would recommend it for others if needed.
Great game for (to use another owner's expression) "old person Stern collectors".
Unfortunately, I sold mine years ago.

I do still need to add a Star Gazer to my backglass collection, but I do not know your price + shipping/insurance since you first started offering them in 2012. Drop me a line.

Cheers.

On digital score windows, I started using a technique where I would apply a thick coat of triple thick over the windows. This results in a flat, clear coat that doesn't appear "foggy". However, depending on how thick or uneven the coat is, there may be some distortion. It isn't really detectable with digital displays since most of the window is black, but it might be detective when backed by white score wheels.

After spraying, don't freak out when it turns a milky white when curing...that's normal, and it will clear up when it fully dries.

Before spraying, it's important to prep the windowed areas carefully. First, clean off any grime. Then clean with sprayway to ensure that no streaks are left behind. Finally, make sure there are no dust particles, or it will leave "bumps" in the coat, similar to when you apply a screen protector in a cell phone. Then make sure the glass is on a level surface (so the thick coat of triple thick can flow evenly as it cures) and finally spray a thick layer of triple thick.

If there are problems with the coat, you can knock it down with novus 3 or 2 and spray again after cleaning off the novus.

Agree with this 100%. Thick coat will dry clear, prep is critical, then coat. Also do the edge of the glass as well. Sealing the art work in place. If TT is done over the score windows it can only be seen really up close. Usually can not be noticed by standing at the front of the game. The TT has to dry as it sits on the surface, try not to create an orange peel like surface.

The temperature of the backglass, TT, and ambient air, are important.

Just read through this thread thanks to @o-din highlighting it.
I think a major component of backglass integrity has to do with the surface condition of the glass before it was screened. There are some titles (mostly Ballys of the '70s) of which you never see a flaky example. "Capt. Fantastic", "Wizard", "Flip Flop", "Monte Carlo", "Old Chicago", "Hi-Lo Ace", "Hi-Deal" and others come to mind. I've often wondered why this is, but I suspect the raw glasses used must have had some type of pre-cleaning or treating done to them which allowed superior ink adhesion. Or, perhaps it was the ink itself which had superior adhesion. Humidity levels, etc. must have also come into play, and I wouldn't imagine that they were strictly controlled.
On the other hand, some of the Williams reverse wedgehead backglasses seem to have the very worst ink adhesion issues. I've seen more bad early '60s Williams backglasses than any other era. I believe much of this has to do with the initial production of the backglasses. Remember, that these machines were built mechanically rugged in order to stand up to abuse in a commercial environment, but overall they were not meant to last. That being said, I would imagine that not a great deal of care was taken preparing the raw glass sheets before being screened with artwork. So, I would imagine that there were some runs where the glass was not adequately prepared, and others where it was.
I've used Triple Thick to seal many backglasses over the years. So far, I've not had any major issues with the ink letting go as with o-din's "Heat Wave" glass. I have seen where it can cause fine spider web cracking to expand a bit. I've seen this on '60s Bally backglasses. It could be a reaction with the chemical nature of the particular ink that was used. With any kind of coating, I would not store a backglass in very cold temperatures. Also, make sure all the backbox lamps are in good condition. Any blackening of the bulb turns them into mini heat lamps. Get rid of them!
I've always said with the application of any type of solvent, fluid, etc. to any part of a pinball machine, each case is a little different, and the results can be variable. I've used Castrol Super Clean or equivalent on many pinball cabinets, and it usually works well. However, on some '60s Bally cabinets, it will start to remove the graphic pattern if left on too long or scrubbed too hard.
Of course, we've all had our experiences with Gottlieb decagon reels. Same thing. Some hold up fine, others lose the black lettering with even the mildest cleaning. We can all speculate on why that is, but I wouldn't summarily categorize Triple Thick as harmful to backglasses any more than I would call water harmful to score reels.