Runoffs F-Prod

joecam96":wqevvpai said:
Would reflective thermal barrier tape be considered a coating?
Click to expand...

Yes, I found no GCR definition of coating, let alone one defining it as "spray on" or "baked on". A coating is
simply

coat·ing
noun: coating; plural noun: coatings
a thin layer or covering of something.

A stuck on tape certainly meets the dictionary's definition of a coating, as does a wrap for that
matter.
 
9.1.5.D.1. Interpretation

An addition, modification, substitution or removal, must not be made unless specifically authorized.

David Dewhurst
F prod Miata
SCCA #250772
 
See Joe, I told you my opinion was iffy!

I already have my REI reflective fiberglass mat cut out, just chickened out sticking it on since I wasn't convinced it was legal.

So now I can install it as long as I'm armed with a dictionary, the Runoffs COA ruling, and Kevin's email address... :)

We still probably ought to get it clarified in the PCS that the intake manifold INSIDE (L2) needs to be untouched but the OUTSIDE can have a coating/barrier/wrap.

Al Seim
HP VW Scirocco
 
Al, I am aware of the COA and so-on. With rule "9.1.5.D.1. Interpretation" above I can hardly wait for the FasTrack COA response.
 
Al,
In regards to the effectiveness of insulating/ coating the exhaust: I have applied ceramic coating for years on the exhaust. The coating I use reduces radiated heat from the surface. 900 degrees at the surface will measure about 90 degrees 1 inch away. This according to the manufacturer and verified by my own experience. On my RX7 I also mount a heat shield between the exhaust and intake. I am seeing egt's of 1600-1650.
 
VW has a heat shield above the header ,stock. I use one.
Now we will have to state the max size of the heat shield, how much of the intake can be covered .
I dont think that we want sheet boxes around the intake? But air boxes are open.. Taken to extreme, I can see an air box enclosing the intake with it own cooling air, plus a separate intake tract. Not the path we should pursue,IMHO.

" Heat shield can cover the shadow of the header plus 2 in on any vertical plane. The ends may wrap around the header but not the intake "
 
Mike -

Between air boxes and "heat shields that are part of the exhaust system" (stock or not shouldn't matter as exhaust is free) there's probably currently no effective limit to making elaborate structures to protect the intake manifold from exhaust heat.

All I want to do is to stick some heat barrier on the outside / bottom of the intake manifold, which will give (IMO) 90% of the possible benefit easily and cheaply. By Kevin's reasoning maybe it's already legal but it would be nice for it to be explicitly so.

The other half of this (and I can't remember if it's been pointed out) is that if the drivetrain coatings bit of the rules allows coating the outside on the intake manifold it presumably also allows coating the inside, which is a bag of worms I'm pretty sure no one wants to open. So that loophole needs to be plugged, while at it I'd like to see a stick on thermal barrier explicitly allowed.

Just my $0.02.

Al Seim
HP VW Scirocco.
 
Don -

Good point. I already have ceramic coated headers. Maybe not as well insulated as yours - I haven't taken any measurements but my intake (sits above header on non-crossflow VW) is pretty hot after a session. I assume much of that is radiation from the headers but again no measurements. Some is obviously conduction from the head.

Gosh we've totally hijacked the Runoffs FP thread!
 
9.1.5.D.2. Interpretation

An authorized addition, modification, substitution or removal can not preform a prohibited function.

Seems rule 9.1.5.D.1. covers the rule that the intake manifold shall not be any thing other than which the written rules allow. Therfore rule .2. enters the picture, a prohibited function.
 
I don't know about all that coating stuff. I just want to do a 124 and make it handle in the infield the way it does on the straights. That would be a killer combination.
 
RACER66":34f8ddw9 said:
Why would coating on an intake manifold make it do something other than be an intake manifold?
Click to expand...

First ask yourself why one would coat/paint/wrap an intake manifold. Then read the following rule.

9.1.5.D.1. Interpretation
An addition, modification, substitution or removal, must not be made unless specifically authorized.

Then find a rule that allows the intake manifold to be coated/painted/wrapped. Keep in mind when looking for said rule we are talking about a level 2 prepped car, not a level 1 prepped car.
 
If the intake manifold is part of the drive train then 9.1.5.2.a.3 makes it legal. If this is the case, you could coat the inside of the intake also.

"3. Stock and permitted alternate components of the drive
train can have thermal barrier and friction altering coatings
applied."

If the intake is not part of the drive train then there is not a rule that would make it legal because of the last sentence in 9.1.5.2.b.7.

"7. The intake manifold may be port matched on the port
mating surface to a depth of no more than one inch.
Balance pipes or tubes on all intake manifolds can be
plugged or restricted. The intake manifold can not otherwise
be modified."

It really needs to be clarified in 9.1.5.2.b that deals with induction. I would like to see a clarification about this so I know if I can legally insulate my intake or not.
 
It really needs to be clarified in 9.1.5.2.b that deals with induction. I would like to see a clarification about this so I know if I can legally insulate my intake or not.[/quote]

Exactly. The only issue is to clarify that the intake can't be coated on the inside. I'm sure the PAC and the CRB will clean up the wording slightly and be done with this.
 
IMO, a good thermal coating on the outside of an aluminum MPFI manifold will have more benefit than any internal coating will.
 
Kevin R -

Re the inside coating - methinks the "effectiveness" of such will depend on the surface finish before and after coating and will have more to do with airflow than heat transfer. I also think that it could be very very hard to tell if an internally coated intake manifold (or intake port in the head for that matter!) was "as cast" prior to coating.

Thus the need for a clarification/change that expressly forbids intake manifold and head port interior coating. And to make things clear, expressly permits intake manifold exterior coating (or forbids it, one or the other).

Al Seim
HP VW Scirocco 1.6
 
David Dewhurst":ix78mhpd said:
Let's we all back track to the beginning of restricted preparation production cars for a bit of the 1996 philosophy of restricted preparation production cars.

1996 SportsCar article, "Back to Basics"
Finding a future for production car racing.
Increasing technology with rising costs has lead to dwindling participation.
What the Comp Board has created, it hopes is a car that the average person can build and maintain in his garage and then run a serious challenge in National Club races. Then called restricted prep (cost effective for the average person) and today called prep level 2.
From here forward we have un-restricted prep cars (prep level 1 today, not cost effective for the average person) and restricted prep cars (prep level 2 today cost effective for the average person). Please don't anyone go down the road that there was no advantage of thermal barrier coating the intake manifold.

Open for your thoughts and discussion.

David Dewhurst
F production Miata #14
SCCA #250772
Click to expand...
 
kruck":yu77vz9d said:
IMO, a good thermal coating on the outside of an aluminum MPFI manifold will have more benefit than any internal coating will.
Click to expand...
If the internal coating produces any advantage then it out performs the manifold that has not been illegally modified. There is at least one company that sells a "stealth coating" why would they offer a product that " cheats it up" if there was not a benefit?
 
David,

A couple hundred (at the most) dollars to coat a manifold is child's play compared to a real exhaust and camshaft r&d program....

A vintage outfit flys up one of the premier header builders from Charlotte and puts him up in a hotel for days at a time to do R&D work. They've done this multiple times... Nothing stopping anyone from then duplicating the final ("for now") out of something like inconel... (Read: how to spend 4 figures on an exhaust program)

Inconel conducts about 1/3 the heat of mild steel... Use it and a very elaborate heat shield, and you mitigate the need for ceramic coating the intake for about 15x the cost.

This doesn't even get into buying pressure transducers and the associated software (entry level is a $10k buy-in).

The same outfit also goes down to Charlotte and rents Spintron time, with several camshaft, valve spring, retainer packages in tow. Every stage of camshaft changes require this..

All would fit within the LP rules package...


This doesn't even touch upon a shock / spring r&d. Nothing stopping anyone from investing 4 figured into a shock package and bringing the car to 7 post rig, then investing in on track testing...


This is kind of like the "vintage spirit" argument in vintage racing...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top