Mystic Premium Binder Vs. Scott Binder

The Mystic Premium Binder can be seen here:

http://www.mysticstamp.com/viewProd...sp?sku=ESDC3

The Scott Binder is here:

https://www.amosadvantage.com/scott...o=&Tab=stamp

Does anyone own both? How do they compare?

the mystic one is better, the premium one that mystic sells is very nice.. I have both types.

The Mystic one is cheaper too. I have the Mystic binder, and I like it. But I wanted another opinion before I spend the money on two more.

I'm resurrecting an old thread here, but I just got the Mystic Premium Binder and slipcase ESDC3 to use for the Heirloom album. This binder is much better than the standard binder. It's not metal-hinged, and I expect that over time, that will be what starts to show wear.
https://www.mysticstamp.com/Product...s/ESDC3/USA/

From the time I got the standard Heirloom album, I knew I would want that binder. It just looks so much better. Plus, the slip case allows for a free-standing album, and also crucially, keeps dust off the album.

In fact, when I got the Heirloom album it was a heavy box with all the pages, etc. A bit of rough handling caused some slight damage to the standard binders. I guess Mystic would have replaced them, but I didn't care that much. I figured at some point I'd be replacing with the premium.

I didn't do an exhaustive search for binders, price vs. features, but $36 a pop was about all I wanted to spend on binder upgrades right now. It seems like there are more expensive binders out there, that have some added features. But this is pretty good for the price in my opinion.

The hinging is the most critical, and costly, component of the binder. The Scott National and Specialty binders hinges are of robust, heavy (for the application) steel and should outlast the rest of the unit. I also appreciate the double stage design of the ring type hinge system that allows for lock release when the tabs are depressed but does not move the rings themselves, that being step two in order to open. Kind of a pistol grip safety for when your binder is unholstered but you are not yet ready to fire.

Hi Rogdcam,

Yes, this is what I mean. I think all in, the Scott will be more expensive, but has some better features. And I see what you mean about the rings. I think the Mystic is beautiful, and is of very good quality for the price. But when I see a hinge like this, I think that one day sometime in the future, the hinge may need some reinforcement.

Can someone post a picture of the rings in the Scott binder, opened and closed?

I emailed Amos and they sent me back pictures of the rings. I am kind of disappointed in the rings, considering how much the binder costs.

They're standard, low budget rings.

The binder costs $37 (for 1") and the rings are not d-rings. They don't have ball and socket enclosure, and they're mounted to the spine instead of the back? That's pretty disappointing.

The Mystic ESDC3 (https://www.mysticstamp.com/Product.../ESDC3/USA/) is currently $36, has a 2-1/4" wide spine, D-rings mounted to the back, plus it comes with a slipcase. I like these. One thing I don't like is the hinges. They're not metal hinges like the Scott. As noted, these un-reinforced hinges are bound to fail sooner. I still think the value is there, and I'd buy another Mystic. Metal hinges would be nice. I haven't actually held the Scott binder in my hands, and it does look nice, but the Mystic ESDC3 is just better value in my view, and if there could be a metal hinge, that would be close to ideal.

I called Mystic and asked them about this metal hinge question, and whether this was ever considered. I was a bit surprised to learn that no one had ever mentioned this before for the "premium" binder. Obviously they buy this binder from a supplier. Meaning, they probably just picked from a standard offering. However other than the custom printing, they have no hand in design and build. A version with a metal hinge would probably make the binder more costly, but depending on that, I would be glad to see that offered. They said they would consider this issue.

"unreinforced hinges are bound to fail sooner....."

Makes me wonder what sort of use is planned for your binders. I have several Big Blue jumbo binders made for the Scott International album pages that are less well put together than what has been pictured, and they still going strong after 35+ years.

I've switched to using Avery Heavy Duty Frame View Binders, from someone's recommendation on here.

https://www.avery.com/products/binders/68055

They come in 1", 1½", 2" and 3". The hinges aren't metal. But the rings are d-rings with ball and socket closures, and the framed view looks very nice.

These binders also cost $8 for the 1" binder. The other sizes are more, but I don't think any of them are over $20.00.

Through the years I have found that hinge failure in binders usually happens from misuse. Metal hinges might be way more important if you're a student and carry a binder in your school bag every day.

My father had a bunch of course material from a correspondence course he took when I was in grade school. I loved the look of the binders. My dad would open and close them all the time, probably for close to a decade. Then when I was in high school, I took one of the binders, filled it with loose leaf paper, and took it to school every day. It took about half the school year before the binder was trashed. The cover tore at the hinge. The rings stopped closing properly. Just a mess.

I think for the average stamp collector, leaving their binders on a bookshelf, and opening them on a table, a "heavy duty" binder is going to last a long time.

Vinyl binders and other relatively cheap binders (example: photo albums with paper hinges and no canvas support) are not built to withstand use beyond a somewhat limited period of time.

I use "good" vinyl binders for my accumulations on Vario sheets and they are usually fine for this purpose...it isn't a big deal to replace them over the years. They are expendable.

A reasonably well-constructed album, on the other hand, will last much longer...and they seldom need repairing or replacing.