What do you think of UTMC AR?

**Happylady** · 08-18-2009, 11:12 AM

I like to use Crizal Avance AR but I can't do it on all lenses. For these I often use Carat Advantage. However, the warranty on the Carat is one replacement during the first two years. My lab warrants the UTMC for two years also but it will be replaced as often as needed.

Now, I don't want to sell UTMC just because of it's better warranty but I wonder how it compares to Carat Advantage? I am interested in how scratch resistant it is and especially how easy it is to clean and how long they stay clean. I see the cleaning problems of AR lenses to be the major problem of them.

So does anyone use UTMC? If you have used it recently what is your opinion of it?

**renee1111** · 08-18-2009, 11:50 AM

I use UTMC3 about 90% of the time and I will vouch for it! It's a very tough coating, that is very easy to clean...definitely comparable to the Advantage.
Hope this helps!

**Happylady** · 08-18-2009, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by renee1111

I use UTMC3 about 90% of the time and I will vouch for it! It's a very tough coating, that is very easy to clean...definitely comparable to the Advantage.
Hope this helps!

Thank you. The lab just called it UTMC not UTMC3. Is UTMC and UTMC3 the same thing now or are there different types like with Crizal?

**rbailen** · 08-18-2009, 12:34 PM

My experience with the original UTMC is not a good one. The front side held up pretty well but like many the backside did not. I tried them out several years ago so the formulas might have been improved??? My favorite is the Crizal family of products, but will use The NVision Plus by the Nexus group for the poly trifocals and other lenses that I can not have Crizal applied... Just my 2 cents.

good Luck

Rob:)

**DragonLensmanWV** · 08-18-2009, 12:59 PM

My experience also with the original UTMC was poor. I had a pair of stock Finalite lenses with UTMC for my reading glasses. Since my RX went south so fast, I only used them for a couple of months. After a year or so,stored safely in their case, I brought them out and the entire AR had...oxidized, for lack of a better word. Front and back, they had such a high coefficient of friction that it was nearly impossible to wipe them with a microfiber cloth. They were worse than the cheapo AR that WM used to use.

**Fezz** · 08-18-2009, 01:07 PM

I had a bad experience with the original UTMC as well!

My ale soaked memory fails me at times, but I sort of remember that the coating scratched as you looked at it, and if it was even slightly breezy, it would peel off and blow away in the wind!

:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::D

**hipoptical** · 08-18-2009, 02:19 PM

If my sources are correct...
UTMC was developed all or in part by a certain someone here on Optiboard. Like all other coatings, the main downfall is in trusting others to follow procedures correctly. If memory serves me correctly, it was good on some products, but failed on others, and some labs did a better job than others. (We used to order it from a Dallas coating facility, and had few troubles. However, I have found that other products are better.)
I haven't used it in a long time, but I seem to remember that on stock lenses it is a decent coating, but as an added coat, it is... well, we don't use it anymore.

**Steve Machol** · 08-18-2009, 03:42 PM

The original UTMC was affected by poor marketing decisions that compromised the quality of the product. It had nothing to do with the original manufacturing process which produced a very good product.

Lesson - don't let the marketing types dictate policies that affect the quality of the product.

**renee1111** · 08-18-2009, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Happylady

Thank you. The lab just called it UTMC not UTMC3. Is UTMC and UTMC3 the same thing now or are there different types like with Crizal?

Sorry for the late response, but in Canada UTMC3 is the third generation utmc. The original UTMC was very hard to clean, but the new version has a hydrophobic/ oliophobic top coat which is ionically bombarded into the lens. The slick coat last about two years (although that is not fact, just an observation).

**For-Life** · 08-18-2009, 05:22 PM

Yeah, UTMC gave me more problems than most other AR's combined

**jameselex** · 08-18-2009, 07:14 PM

my own experience only, they are about the worst , even on their stock lenses, coating comes off in a few weeks.

**Georg Mayer** · 08-20-2009, 08:42 AM

Happylady, if the xyz-AR is coming out of the same Lab than your Premium AR has been coming from (and you had no trouble) you should have no issue with xyz-AR either. The quality of any AR is partially in the recipie but to a larger part a reflection of the workmanship of that particular Lab.

Georg Mayer
Better Best then Biggest

**Happylady** · 08-20-2009, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by Georg Mayer

Happylady, if the xyz-AR is coming out of the same Lab than your Premium AR has been coming from (and you had no trouble) you should have no issue with xyz-AR either. The quality of any AR is partially in the recipie but to a larger part a reflection of the workmanship of that particular Lab.

I think there is something to this but I also think quality of ARs vary quite a bit. I got a Sharpview AR from this same lab on my husband's glasses to try it out and I find it scratches a lot easier then Crizal Avance or Alize AR.

A number of people here say they don't like UTMC but I wonder if they have tried the new UTMC3 or if they are talking about the old UTMC that I also had problems with.

**Fezz** · 08-20-2009, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Happylady

A number of people here say they don't like UTMC but I wonder if they have tried the new UTMC3 or if they are talking about the old UTMC that I also had problems with.

I am talking about the old school UTMC. I had such a crummy experience, that I would never try it again!!!

:angry::cheers::cheers::shiner::cheers::cheers::D

**Happylady** · 08-20-2009, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by Fezz

I am talking about the old school UTMC. I had such a crummy experience, that I would never try it again.

You sound like some of my patients that had a bad experience with AR and won't try it again. :)

**Chris Ryser** · 08-20-2009, 01:49 PM

When a company has a product quality problem of one kind or another they usually work their bud off to correct it and usually don't stop until it is solved.

It is not fair to badmouth a product that one has not tried maybe in years, after having had a problem with it. If anybody has had a recent problem, then he or she should come forward and say so.

The quality of any AR is partially in the recipe but to a larger part a reflection of the workmanship of that particular Lab.

Georg Mayer

Georg, who made above quoted statement is and has been active in AR coatings for some of the major corporations you admire and definitely is in the knowhow.

**Refractingoptician.com** · 08-20-2009, 02:05 PM

A few minutes ago , another customer came in . I sold him this job in 2005. We replaced it twice previously and the last time was less than a year ago. Today the lens coating was garbage, again . Draw what ever conclusions you wish .

**Happylady** · 08-20-2009, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by Refractingoptician.com

A few minutes ago , another customer came in . I sold him this job in 2005. We replaced it twice previously and the last time was less than a year ago. Today the lens coating was garbage, again . Draw what ever conclusions you wish .

Was it UTMC3?

**Chris Ryser** · 08-21-2009, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by Refractingoptician.com

A few minutes ago , another customer came in . I sold him this job in 2005. We replaced it twice previously and the last time was less than a year ago. Today the lens coating was garbage, again . Draw what ever conclusions you wish .

That makes just about once a year......................would be worth to find out what patient is doing and what chemical environment he is working in. what lens cleaner he is using.

**AdmiralKnight** · 08-21-2009, 12:54 PM

We use UTMC3 for about 95% of our surfaced AR*. No problems (other than the very rare craze, but all ARs get that). I have four pairs of glasses, with four different ARs. They personally rate:

4) Teflon
3) Crizal Alize (not Avance)
2) UTMC3
1) HMC+ (Stock Centennial coating! It's awesome.)

*Stock UTMC3 seems a lot worse than surfaced. It's more like the old normal UTMC.