Was Bally "Tuff Coat" Diamond Plates failed cousin??

[nomad]

Started restoration work on a Paragon tonight and there is a note
stapled to the pf bottom that touts the Bally "Tuff Coat" and how it
will extend the life of the pf, etc, etc. Now, from what I see, either
this Paragon got the hell played out of it (like all the rest of them)
or this Tuff Coat didn't do diddly squat to protect the pf. Was this a
Bally experiment that never got off the ground? It certainly didn't do
the job like DP does!

nomad

[seymour...@excite.com]

No, tuff coat was just marketing hype. Same old stuff everyone else
was using at the time.

[c...@provide.net]

Tuff-coat was just Bally's name for acrylic lacquer.
Which was the same clearcoat finish used on
all playfields up till Urethane ("diamondplate")
was used by Williams (and "stealthcoat" by DE).

[ldnayman]

To be fair whatever they were all using seemed to work pretty well back
then anyway. I generally don't really see heavy wear on games untill
the late 70s, when gameplay started getting really fast and nothing was
being done to protect playfields. And on games like Capt. Fantastic
that just got the crap played out of them.

[cch...@comcast.net]

The T-C was better than paint alone.

That Prgn probably lasted well past ROI, multiple times over. What
probably finally killed it was the inserts sagging, starting the
"teardrop" wear over the inserts that spreads to cover the whole field.
By then, though, earnings were all profit.

-cody
CARGPB4