Comparison
Bodaq® vs 3M™ DI-NOC™
Bodaq and 3M DI-NOC are closely comparable products: both are roughly 8 mil self-adhesive architectural films supplied on 48-inch by 164-foot rolls, both use an air-release adhesive, and both publish ASTM E84 results. The decision usually comes down to the pattern you want, availability and price rather than to a technical gap. Surface Supply carries both.
Side by side
| Bodaq (Hyundai L&C) | 3M DI-NOC | |
|---|---|---|
| Film thickness | 0.2 mm (8 mil) | 8 mil (200 microns), film and adhesive |
| Standard roll | 48″ × 164 ft | 48″ × 164 ft (1,220 mm × 50 m) |
| Adhesive | Acrylic pressure-sensitive with channelled air release | 3M Comply pressure-sensitive with air-release channels |
| Fire testing | ASTM E84 (Class A) across all interior finishes; CAN/ULC-S102 and DIN 4102-1 also reported; test reports issued per pattern series | ASTM E84; 3M reports most patterns at flame-spread 25 or less and smoke-developed 450 or less, to be verified per pattern |
| Install method | Dry, hand-applied, 12-38 °C | Dry, hand-applied |
| Published pattern count | 468 in the 2026-27 catalog | Varies by region and current range |
Bodaq figures are from Hyundai L&C's technical data bulletin. DI-NOC figures are from 3M's published technical data sheet; check the current revision for the pattern you are specifying, as 3M's range includes speciality films at other thicknesses.
What is genuinely the same
The format is effectively interchangeable. Both are around 8 mil, both come 48 inches wide on 164-foot rolls, both rely on a channelled pressure-sensitive adhesive so air can be worked out during application, and both are installed dry with the same tools by the same trades. A crew that installs one installs the other. Detailing, substrate preparation and edge treatment are the same discipline in both cases.
Fire testing is similar in structure: both manufacturers test to ASTM E84. Every Bodaq interior finish carries a Class A result, with the report issued per pattern series; 3M reports results per pattern. In either case the practical step is the same: fix the pattern first, then ask for the report that covers it.
What actually differs
- The pattern libraries. This is the real decision. The ranges overlap in category (woodgrain, stone, metal, textile, solid) but the individual patterns are different products. If a scheme is built around a specific grain or vein, one library will match it better than the other.
- Availability and lead time. What is in stock in the US on the day you need it varies by pattern and by range. This changes month to month and is worth asking about before specifying.
- Price. Both are quoted by pattern and quantity rather than published, so compare like for like on the actual codes.
- Range structure. Bodaq's catalog is organised into 24 collections with a printed index; DI-NOC is organised by its own product series. Neither is better; they are different ways of navigating a large library.
Which fits your project
Choose on the pattern and the programme, not on a spec sheet difference that mostly is not there. In practice:
- Start from the finish. Find the closest match in each library and get physical samples of both. Under the project's actual lighting the difference between two "oaks" is far larger than any difference between the two brands.
- Request the fire report early if the surface sits in a code-driven location. Both brands supply reports; ask for the one that covers your chosen pattern so it is in the submittal from the start.
- Ask about stock for the quantity and date you need.
Because Surface Supply carries both lines, you can compare real samples of each against the same brief rather than committing to a brand first. Ask for samples of both and say what you are trying to match.
Where to look next
Browse the Bodaq side by collection (Standard Wood, Stone & Marble, Solid) or the full index of 468 patterns. For the technical file, see performance and test data and fire ratings explained.