• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CGC v. PGX?

Started by RockMapleCasbah,

243 posts in this topic

Hepcat

Hepcat

Posted
Posted
read this to discover and formulate your own answer:

 

http://www.justafanboy.com/PGX/

 

The most damning indictment of PGX I've seen was when the trimmed Wheaties giveaways including Donald Duck's Atom Bomb were put back up for sale on Ebay after being trimmed, presumably by the owner, and then slabbed as 9.8s by PGX with basically zilch turnaround time. So did Terrance Leder coincidentally live just down the block from PGX's office?

 

:tonofbricks:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joecgcmaniac

joecgcmaniac

Posted
Posted
read this to discover and formulate your own answer:

 

http://www.justafanboy.com/PGX/

 

The most damning indictment of PGX I've seen was when the trimmed Wheaties giveaways including Donald Duck's Atom Bomb were put back up for sale on Ebay after being trimmed, presumably by the owner, and then slabbed as 9.8s by PGX with basically zilch turnaround time. So did Terrance Leder coincidentally live just down the block from PGX's office?

 

:tonofbricks:

 

They all hang out in Ryan's mom's garage, where PGX slabs their books. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JollyComics

JollyComics

Posted
Posted
I just don't believe there's an RC cola....happy?!?

 

While not widely sold in Canada, Royal Crown Cola is actually quite popular in the States. RC Cola's vote total was surprisingly high in the last poll I've seen on favourite soft drinks:

 

Coca-Cola 20

Mountain Dew 12

A & W Root Beer 12

Orange Crush 11

Dr. Pepper 11

Pepsi-Cola 9

Cream Soda 8

Barq's Root Beer 7

Canada Dry Ginger Ale 7

Vernor's Ginger Ale 6

Squirt 6

RC Cola 6

 

:preach:

I never saw RC cola out here in the wild west after glass bottles disappeared

:)

 

I know I drank some pops in Canada. All cans or bottles are much smaller and the taste is little flat. Just wondered why the taste is different than here in USA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony S

Tony S

Posted
Posted
One thing you can say about PGX and that is that their holder is superior to CGC's holder! CGC really needs to get their act together in that regard! EJR

 

Even the most vocal PGX critics will admit to PGX having a good holder. However, I'll disagree with the "superior to CGC" statement. While in college I worked two years in a plastics plant (actually I was the "2nd shift foreman", but there were only 4 people on second shift) So I know a bit more about plastics than the average person. I have also unslabbed a LOT of books, including 100 or more PGX books. so I've gotten a good look at the slabs.

 

I don't believe the PGX holder is actually better than CGC's. With most things plastics, it's usually a compromise for preferred qualities. PGX and CGC have made different choices.

 

The inner holder used by both CGC and PGX is Barex. A compromise. More archival choices exist - Mylar for instance. But Mylar is a hard material to work with and seal, with a very high melting point. Barex can be sealed with much lower temperatures and it's archival enough, having been approved by the FDA for both packaging food and medicine.

 

Neither company states what the outer holder is made of. I suspect that is because several suitable plastics are available and they want to be able to switch without fanfare if one becomes cheaper. For instance, while It's unlikely that polycarbonate will ever be cheaper, but it if was it'd be a fine choice. I'm reasonably certain both companies are using some flavor of acrylic for the outer holders. PGX's holder actually weighs about an ounce more than CGC's and the plastic formulation is a little "softer". It resists cracking better than CGC's but is more easily scratched. CGC's holder resists scratching better - but the holder is more likely to crack if mishandled.

 

So in my mind, neither holder is better. Just a little different, based on what properties were prioritized.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Underground44

Underground44

Posted
Posted
What in gods name is "RC soda"?

 

Mud water.

 

:whistle:

 

"RC soda" = Royal Crown soda. They make a cola. Now you're just being petty. Typical.

 

-J.

Never heard of it.

 

If you see it, don't waste your money. Supermarket-branded cola would be better.

 

Sorry, I am just being petty. That's typical of me, though how a noob would even begin to think that, IDK.

 

;)

 

 

 

-slym

 

What's "typical" is someone going off point and turning petty when they have nothing left constructive to say. Now you're even bashing poor old RC lol.

 

And I'm sorry but do they give out special prizes around here when someone gets to a certain post number? Keep it up and this board will only have about eight people on it, each with over 1,000,000 post counts. I'm starting to think that's what some on here actually want. Come on already. lol

 

-J.

 

The bottom line is this... Everyone on these boards has seen a copy of this exact thread with the same arguments one hundred times over and it becomes tiresome after a while. Use the search function and you'll see that PGX aren't a viable alternative (A lot of board members have presented you with plenty of evidence in this thread also).

I wish there was reasonable competition but there isn't. PGX holders seem stronger but I wouldn't trust the archival qualities of them.

You'll never win this argument on here.

 

Welcome to the boards (thumbs u

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ebel 1911

Ebel 1911

Posted
Posted
One thing you can say about PGX and that is that their holder is superior to CGC's holder! CGC really needs to get their act together in that regard! EJR

 

Even the most vocal PGX critics will admit to PGX having a good holder. However, I'll disagree with the "superior to CGC" statement. While in college I worked two years in a plastics plant (actually I was the "2nd shift foreman", but there were only 4 people on second shift) So I know a bit more about plastics than the average person. I have also unslabbed a LOT of books, including 100 or more PGX books. so I've gotten a good look at the slabs.

 

I don't believe the PGX holder is actually better than CGC's. With most things plastics, it's usually a compromise for preferred qualities. PGX and CGC have made different choices.

 

The inner holder used by both CGC and PGX is Barex. A compromise. More archival choices exist - Mylar for instance. But Mylar is a hard material to work with and seal, with a very high melting point. Barex can be sealed with much lower temperatures and it's archival enough, having been approved by the FDA for both packaging food and medicine.

 

Neither company states what the outer holder is made of. I suspect that is because several suitable plastics are available and they want to be able to switch without fanfare if one becomes cheaper. For instance, while It's unlikely that polycarbonate will ever be cheaper, but it if was it'd be a fine choice. I'm reasonably certain both companies are using some flavor of acrylic for the outer holders. PGX's holder actually weighs about an ounce more than CGC's and the plastic formulation is a little "softer". It resists cracking better than CGC's but is more easily scratched. CGC's holder resists scratching better - but the holder is more likely to crack if mishandled.

 

So in my mind, neither holder is better. Just a little different, based on what properties were prioritized.

 

 

I was wondering why the assertion was made about pgx having a superior holder but this explanation is interesting. I've never had complaints about any of my slabs but if it all comes down to scratch & crack resistance then I can see why some would prefer one over the other...at least for slab endurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EJR

EJR

Posted
Posted
One thing you can say about PGX and that is that their holder is superior to CGC's holder! CGC really needs to get their act together in that regard! EJR

 

Even the most vocal PGX critics will admit to PGX having a good holder. However, I'll disagree with the "superior to CGC" statement. While in college I worked two years in a plastics plant (actually I was the "2nd shift foreman", but there were only 4 people on second shift) So I know a bit more about plastics than the average person. I have also unslabbed a LOT of books, including 100 or more PGX books. so I've gotten a good look at the slabs.

 

I don't believe the PGX holder is actually better than CGC's. With most things plastics, it's usually a compromise for preferred qualities. PGX and CGC have made different choices.

 

The inner holder used by both CGC and PGX is Barex. A compromise. More archival choices exist - Mylar for instance. But Mylar is a hard material to work with and seal, with a very high melting point. Barex can be sealed with much lower temperatures and it's archival enough, having been approved by the FDA for both packaging food and medicine.

 

Neither company states what the outer holder is made of. I suspect that is because several suitable plastics are available and they want to be able to switch without fanfare if one becomes cheaper. For instance, while It's unlikely that polycarbonate will ever be cheaper, but it if was it'd be a fine choice. I'm reasonably certain both companies are using some flavor of acrylic for the outer holders. PGX's holder actually weighs about an ounce more than CGC's and the plastic formulation is a little "softer". It resists cracking better than CGC's but is more easily scratched. CGC's holder resists scratching better - but the holder is more likely to crack if mishandled.

 

So in my mind, neither holder is better. Just a little different, based on what properties were prioritized.

 

Given the choice I would much rather have my book in a holder that scratches easily rather than a holder that cracks easily! So in my opinion the PGX holder is superior to the CGC holder. I wish that wasn't the case since I only have one PGX book and many CGC books. EJR
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing