# Brownell's Astroflight vs. BCY's Dynaflight 10



## 3dshooter80 (Mar 13, 2006)

I have been building strings for several years now and I have used material made by both Brownell and BCY. With that being said, I had settled on 452X as my material of choice, and it has been that way for the last two years. The main reasons that I made that decision is the color choices available, and the strings that I made from 452X were always 3-5 feet faster at identical length, strand count, and serving length. 
I have had some interest as of late in the newest generation of non-blended materials. As I have been told, the new SK78 Dyneema which is what Astroflight and Dynaflight 10 are made out of, is only produced in 2-3 places in the entire world. That means, that the two materials are basically identical. In order for them to both claim to be 100% SK78 Dyneema, they have to be indentical chemically. The only things that could be different are the strand diameter (measured in a unit called "denier"). 
My question is this: with both materials being essentially the same, why are we not hearing about Dynaflight 10? My guess is that the reason is that since Brownell does not have a product that competes with Trophy, they are pushing Astroflight hard. Since BCY does not have to compete with Astroflight, they are pushing Trophy. 
What I want to know is who has tried BOTH of the SK78 materials? Only those that have tried BOTH need respond. Which one do you prefer? Do you notice any differences in strand size/count? Burnishing/finishing? Build layout/stretch? 
Thanks ahead of time for all intelligent, knowledgable responses. If you are thinking about posting any of the usual paid poster crap, find another thread!!


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

:happy1:epsi:



3dshooter80 said:


> I have been building strings for several years now and I have used material made by both Brownell and BCY. With that being said, I had settled on 452X as my material of choice, and it has been that way for the last two years. The main reasons that I made that decision is the color choices available, and the strings that I made from 452X were always 3-5 feet faster at identical length, strand count, and serving length.
> I have had some interest as of late in the newest generation of non-blended materials. As I have been told, the new SK78 Dyneema which is what Astroflight and Dynaflight 10 are made out of, is only produced in 2-3 places in the entire world. That means, that the two materials are basically identical. In order for them to both claim to be 100% SK78 Dyneema, they have to be indentical chemically. The only things that could be different are the strand diameter (measured in a unit called "denier").
> My question is this: with both materials being essentially the same, why are we not hearing about Dynaflight 10? My guess is that the reason is that since Brownell does not have a product that competes with Trophy, they are pushing Astroflight hard. Since BCY does not have to compete with Astroflight, they are pushing Trophy.
> What I want to know is who has tried BOTH of the SK78 materials? Only those that have tried BOTH need respond. Which one do you prefer? Do you notice any differences in strand size/count? Burnishing/finishing? Build layout/stretch?
> Thanks ahead of time for all intelligent, knowledgable responses. If you are thinking about posting any of the usual paid poster crap, find another thread!!


----------



## String Twister (Dec 23, 2006)

I tested both and the astro hands down has a more stable peep and has rounder string bundles. I have been exclusive BCY for years and am now expanding to astro as well.; It is a builders dream. The D-10 is like most BCY stuff as it is somewhat inconsistent.
NOTE I haven't seen any speed change from equal diameter string of astro-452x BUT it lays up better then anything I have ever built with.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

Some good reading...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-molecular-weight_polyethylene

Some things to note in the description

1. is self-lubricating comparable to that of Teflon
2. highly resistant to abrasion
3. has better abrasion resistance than Teflon
4. 15 times more resistant to abrasion than carbon steel
5. High-performance lines (such as backstays) for sailing and parasailing are made of UHMWPE, due to their low stretch, high strength, and low weight


----------



## Schpankme (Dec 6, 2010)

3dshooter80 said:


> ... I have been building strings for several years
> ... I have used material made by both Brownell and BCY.
> ... I had settled on 452X as my material of choice
> ... I made that decision is the color choices available, and the strings
> ...



So basically, you'll be using a *high modulus polyethylene material*, with what ever brand name assigned. I miss the Spectra blend days!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

3dshooter80 said:


> I have been building strings for several years now and I have used material made by both Brownell and BCY. With that being said, I had settled on 452X as my material of choice, and it has been that way for the last two years. The main reasons that I made that decision is the color choices available, and the strings that I made from 452X were always 3-5 feet faster at identical length, strand count, and serving length.
> I have had some interest as of late in the newest generation of non-blended materials. As I have been told, the new SK78 Dyneema which is what Astroflight and Dynaflight 10 are made out of, is only produced in 2-3 places in the entire world. That means, that the two materials are basically identical. In order for them to both claim to be 100% SK78 Dyneema, they have to be indentical chemically. The only things that could be different are the strand diameter (measured in a unit called "denier").
> My question is this: with both materials being essentially the same, why are we not hearing about Dynaflight 10? My guess is that the reason is that since Brownell does not have a product that competes with Trophy, they are pushing Astroflight hard. Since BCY does not have to compete with Astroflight, they are pushing Trophy.
> What I want to know is who has tried BOTH of the SK78 materials? Only those that have tried BOTH need respond. Which one do you prefer? Do you notice any differences in strand size/count? Burnishing/finishing? Build layout/stretch?
> Thanks ahead of time for all intelligent, knowledgable responses. If you are thinking about posting any of the usual paid poster crap, find another thread!!


Brownell does not claim Astroflight to be 100% SK-78 Dyneema. All they say is it is 100% HMPE so your assumption is not based on fact, unless you know something we do not know?


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

I don't know what material astroflight is but the process in which some materials are made can change their characteristics. Certain procedures can alter the way a material performs. If it is sk78, brownell could have the material produced to change some of it's characteristics. What material and how it is made seems to be a secrete so it's hard to say.


----------

