I’ve just ordered a new lounge. There is an option for scotchguarding (for an additional payment). Does anyone know if this is worthwhile or just a gimmick?
2 Likes
Hi @aswr, welcome to the community.
Scotchguard or other fabric protectors are generally worth it if you have a fabric which is difficult to clean (tends to absorb stains) and you plan to drink or eat on the lounge. It has little value on some fabrics such as shiny leather or vinyl surfaces. For such products, it is best to get products specially suited to them.
Saying this, if is far cheaper to buy your own fabric protector than purchase it through the retailer. A can or two ($10-24) will be enough to cover a large lounge and most likely will be far cheaper than the retailer option. You also need to recoat regularly to retain the protection abilities.
This blog may also be of use to you and confirms what is outlined above:
3 Likes
In addition to what @phb posted many of the ‘packs’ furniture shops sell require periodic maintenance resprays at your cost. Miss one and any guarantee or service promised is voided.
DIY is not difficult but instructions must be followed religiously, no shortcuts taken, or the result may be patchy.
2 Likes
Thank you both for your helpful advice. The material is a polyester, so that should be easy to clean anyway. I might give the scotch guard a miss 
3 Likes
I have used Scotchguard and other waterproofing products on lounges (and outdoor clothes).
As the previous posters say, it is much cheaper if you do it yourself and you know that it has actually been done. I found the DIY products to work quite well, but must be reapplied (as stated above) to maintain the protection.
2 Likes
I worked at a furniture place and a person who applied protective coating to fabrics said scotch brand was, useless. He used another brand sure did charge a fortune per seat must of made money
I have used scotch on furniture over the years and with the exception of my sometimes questionable application ‘talents’ it has done everything advertised.
My guess is he used one his customers could not check out easily while doing his bit to discredit a DIY. eg Scotch is available in many places. Hence a reason he could
2 Likes
There are a variety of products/brands available. Each promote their product as having something different that makes it a better choice. Even the 3M branded Scotchguard has changed it’s formulation over time. This makes objective comparisons of different products more difficult.
Some boast ‘nanotechnology’ as a natural solution to using chemical treatments. Although nanotech is still based on manufacturing a chemical formulation.
We had a fabric lounge setting protected at first purchase. We did not continue with a regular reapplication. It’s had 25 years of regular use. It responded well to a professional clean (twice in that time). The fabric has worn thin on several of the arms with small tears now evident. The home environment and how the item of furniture is used can make a difference.
2 Likes
Maybe some people in business want to make a product they use better or claim to be better than others. I do not doubt any product over anything else. In regards to the person who would spray or treat upholstery /fabric when i mentioned brands other than the one he used surely seemed to think his, was, superior. Its no different to how things are marketed bit like on TV shows selling things promoting ours, os better than the rest. I really think the upholstery guy who was treating the furniture for stains where i worked was in a lucrative business just an opinion.
I have read recently about some of the chemicals in certain fabric protectors that seem to be harmful to the environment and also may pose a risk to the health of individuals. Eg see https://protectmeproducts.co/au/is-scotchgard-safe/ (my thoughts this is probably a biased view). What is the latest view about the need for and safety of fabric protectors for home furnishings?
1 Like
Welcome to the community.
I have moved your question to an existing topic which covers at least some of what you have asked if you have a read of the preceding posts.
4 Likes
I purposely avoided using a brand name and also wanted a broader discussion than “worthwhile”. Anyway let’s see what info comes out!
3 Likes
While ‘fabric protection’ is the appropriate term ‘scotchguarding’ is often used for it in the same way as ‘jeep’ for a 4WD, hoovering for vacuuming, biro for a ball pen, and so on, because those products were first to market.
4 Likes
As @PhilT pointed out scotchguarding is used as a generic term vs Scotchguard with a capital is the brand name, but to open the topic up and remove any possible confusion I have renamed the topic.
Unfortunately the link you provided to a cleaning product manufacturer clearly named the Scotchguard product.
To create an improved image, they are trying to maximise fault with the 3M product without providing evidence, and maximise their products benefits again without evidence.
On the protectme ingredients page, apparently there is nothing in the product apart from silica dioxide (SiO2) and water.
In their FAQs it says that “protectME is made with pure silica (SiO2), an inert substance found in nature in things like sand or quartz; and that is already in use in many products such as glass or the water we drink.”
They haven’t given any ingredient list, so they don’t state what the concentration of the SiO2 is that makes it as safe as drinking water. Nor have they shown that it is not just drinking water.
So why are they charging that sort of money for what could just be drinking water?
{Edit: What I was trying to show is that due to the very poor documentation (all marketting material and no content) and complete absence of an ingredients, list you just don’t know what you are buying.}
4 Likes
There are a number of “water proofing” products available that promise no PFC (Perfluorochemicals) content. These might provide fabric protection for a user’s furniture, as they work by creating a barrier to fluids. I use a product (that uses water for the carrier of the ingredients) for my shoes that offers this claim, as far as I know it is based on SiO2 (Silicon Dioxide or silica), and it works well for me but requires reapplication when the shoes have become very wet, it is important that before application that the item that is to be protected is dry and clean. After application the item must be allowed to dry before using. I have used it on the lounge and it certainly requires regular reapplication to maintain the barrier on that as well. Greasy soils still need removal by shampooing/steam cleaning to ensure removal, and after the clean reapplication of the “sealer” is definitely required. On the lounge I no longer use it, as a regular clean is all that is required to maintain it rather than adding further expense by including the spraying to seal it. If a fabric is affected by water such as some silks, then a water based product would seem counter intuitive to use, in this case a non-water based product that may contain PFC might be the only “safe” choice to offer the required protection. Of course testing any product first on an inconspicuous area should always be carried out, to ensure that it is safe to apply to the remainder.
2 Likes
Hopefully the manufacturer is not relying on that statement as the sole evidence.
It’s worth considering SiO2 and silica dust are the same chemistry. Cumulative exposure to fine particles of silica dust are known to cause harm. The potential is greatest and likely more harmful the finer the particles. Whether a protective aerosol spray product increases your personal exposure risk, is reassurance required?
2 Likes
