Squirt Cycling Products Introduce Easyfill Pouch for Squirt SEAL Tyre Sealant

[Eldron]

1 minute ago, Trashy said:

Packaging weighs 33% less but they are supplying 20% less product than the previous packaging....

So it's far less than 33% overall weight loss.

So better yes?

[PhilipV]

I think the real villain here is whoever buys sealant in small quantities and small packaging. 

Buy a proper bottle, break the bead and decant as needed. Sealant doesn't go off in storage, your paying less per ml, and you have stock when you need it on an awkward Friday night before a race. 

And these bottles are also recyclable if you believe that the people at recycling sorting tables will actually touch something that is obviously full of latex and gross. 

 

That reminds me, my 2.5L bottle is almost empty, I need to buy another one. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by PhilipV

[love2fly]

1 hour ago, Eldron said:

Along with the new Easyfill Pouch’s hassle-free application benefit it is also more environmentally friendly and easier to transport than the 150-millilitre plastic bottle it replaces. The laminate packaging is reusable for other purposes, unlike the single-use plastic bottles. Yet it is robust enough to be stored in a toolbox or packed in a bike packing bag without risk of leakage. 

For the distributors the benefits of the Squirt SEAL Tyre Sealant 120ml Easyfill Pouch include that the geometry of the pouches increases bulk packing efficiency by as much as 53%. This translates into cheaper logistics and increased energy efficiency for transportation. Compared to Squirt Cycling Products’ previous 150ml bottles, the packaging of the laminate pouches weighs 33% less, which further reduces transportation costs. 

If you just decant from a one Litre into the "old" 150ml bottle it's 100% less packaging....

[Eldron]

50 minutes ago, love2fly said:

If you just decant from a one Litre into the "old" 150ml bottle it's 100% less packaging....

And hopefully everybody that buys the new sachet will do the same.

 

[Trashy]

1 hour ago, Eldron said:

So better yes?

This is a strange hill you're willing to die on.

Not only is the packaging "saving" negligible, but you now have to buy sealant more often, because you get 30ml less every time you buy.

That doesn't sound like an improvement that's really worth advertising.

[Eldron]

2 minutes ago, Trashy said:

This is a strange hill you're willing to die on.

Not only is the packaging "saving" negligible, but you now have to buy sealant more often, because you get 30ml less every time you buy.

That doesn't sound like an improvement that's really worth advertising.

Die on hill - attack on hill - I'm just battling to understand how people are saying a product that is (marginally) but factually better for the environment is worse for the environment....

Surely less damage to the environment is better? Or is it cooler to attack companies for trying to improve things?

 

[BaGearA]

10 hours ago, Eldron said:

Die on hill - attack on hill - I'm just battling to understand how people are saying a product that is (marginally) but factually better for the environment is worse for the environment....

Surely less damage to the environment is better? Or is it cooler to attack companies for trying to improve things?

 

I think its down to who will leave an old bottle in the garage to refill the tyres with sealent or refill from the big bottle vs who will leave A 'sakkie ' to do the same with 

 

I for sure know in which camp I'm in 

[MTBeer]

this is like a Friday thread. Except it's a Good Friday thread, so you okes are being very polite.

[love2fly]

I'd think a Biodegradable product in a reusable bottle that is compostable would be newsworthy. The fact that it's less product in a different frock says that Squirt are howling at the moon. 😃 

[117]

2 hours ago, Steady Spin said:

Like I said, South Africa does not have a culture of recycling. 

 

On the contrary Spin, as a country we're actually rather good at recycling. 
You and I dont recycle. Period. The chaps that trolley up and down your road at 3am in the mornings once a week do. 

I think the issue here is that the empty product shouldnt be found at the top of a road pass or on the manicured trails. Much the same that you'd be just as bummed to find a Stan's bottle up there anyway - or heavan forbid... a mask! You cant blame the product for some chop disposing of the material in an inappropriate way

Laminated plastics today are much easier to recycle as the technology of the proccessing plants have advanced a big jump in recent times. Besides, the trolley guys will be happier with a pouch as they can cram more into the trolleys to get to the recycling plant. Empty bottles just take up space. 

At the end of the day its a well thought out product offering. Easy, re-usable and simple enough to pop one into your travel tool box anyway. 

Lets not go down the non-biodegradable road thinking its the recyclables fault

 

 

 

[Trashy]

41 minutes ago, Eldron said:

Die on hill - attack on hill - I'm just battling to understand how people are saying a product that is (marginally) but factually better for the environment is worse for the environment....

Surely less damage to the environment is better? Or is it cooler to attack companies for trying to improve things?

 

I think the lack of enthusiasm for this change is simply that the benefit to Squirt's profit margin is far greater than any benefit to the environment.

It's certainly not revolutionary enough to base the marketing on its slightly reduced environmental footprint.

 

Edit: For reference, I only buy sealant in bulk, and use a Stan's applicator syringe, which I keep full in my tool box for top-ups.

Edited April 14, 2022 by Trashy

[tubed]

If the product had been a new re-useable applicator which was convenient in the workshop and out on the trails - then winner.

But sadly it is a product which is convenient and disposable whether used in the workshop or on the trail - that's the intention.

The greenwashing is the marketing splurb which accompanies it and attempts to justify the single use product when it is simply another product line. If they had simply said 'a new product for those who prize speed and convenience when topping up' - but that doesnt sound lekker.

I am sure the marketing folk from Squirt are reading this - hopefully as they have a great legacy and I think they can do better. 

[Steady Spin]

1 hour ago, 117 said:

On the contrary Spin, as a country we're actually rather good at recycling. 
You and I dont recycle. Period. The chaps that trolley up and down your road at 3am in the mornings once a week do. 

I think the issue here is that the empty product shouldnt be found at the top of a road pass or on the manicured trails. Much the same that you'd be just as bummed to find a Stan's bottle up there anyway - or heavan forbid... a mask! You cant blame the product for some chop disposing of the material in an inappropriate way

Laminated plastics today are much easier to recycle as the technology of the proccessing plants have advanced a big jump in recent times. Besides, the trolley guys will be happier with a pouch as they can cram more into the trolleys to get to the recycling plant. Empty bottles just take up space. 

At the end of the day its a well thought out product offering. Easy, re-usable and simple enough to pop one into your travel tool box anyway. 

Lets not go down the non-biodegradable road thinking its the recyclables fault

 

 

 

I take it back then. I completely forgot about the trolley guys. 

I do recycle though. I put all the recyclable bits in clear plastic bags for them to identify and make life easier. 

[Robbie Stewart]

I have been faithfully using Stan's all these years, and while at the LBS a week or two ago decided on the whim to buy two 150ml Squirt bottles. I found that the initial process to get the sealant into the tyre is finicky in that I constantly had to press the bottle 'just so' else it would just stop flowing, and by the time I did the second wheel it was almost second nature.

Now, I had been having issues with my valves as well resulting in a half deflated tyre by the time I'm ready to descend at the top of the climb. I replaced the valve stem and it changed nothing. After filling up with Squirt, I've had two rides since without even touching the valve caps on the wheels.

In my humble experience I am finding Squirt to be the business, more so than Stan's which costs a heck of lot more than Squirt. It turns out my LBS also only uses Squirt.

Which gets me thinking how much of Stan's is pure PR hype, and how much of it is real. . .

[Baracuda]

20 hours ago, love2fly said:

I happily use this. Did 2 wheels yesterday and did not spill one drop. Used my floor pump for one but the other, being an existing tubeless tyres velcroed together a bit and had to go to service station for air....

I don't see how it improves on this Enduro Seal bottle that I have used many, many times. The Enduro Seal bottle also allows me to place exactly 80ml into each gravel tire. With the Squirt option is 120mm or nothing it seems. I am not sure how you accurately regulate the amount added.

[ChrisF]

4 hours ago, Eldron said:

Die on hill - attack on hill - I'm just battling to understand how people are saying a product that is (marginally) but factually better for the environment is worse for the environment....

Surely less damage to the environment is better? Or is it cooler to attack companies for trying to improve things?

 

 

So lets stir the pot a bit .... being "Friday" and all that ....

 

 

Many provinces in SA use a dual waste bin approach, with separate removal days for recyclables.  These go to dedicated sites where paper and plastic is separated.  On conveyor systems the papers are further sub.sorted ... same with the plastics ....  these are baled and then sent to sites for re.cycling.

 

Private companies tender and pay for the contracts to run these recycling facilities.

 

Yes ... there are flaws in the system .... but we have come a long way in recent years 👍