joepaluch wrote:


How can you say the coating was at fault for the increase in Horsepower when your statement leads one to believe that 2 NEW VARIABLES were introduced into the environment at the same time? how can you isolate the effects of one versus the other? Just wondering....

I am truly uneducated when it comes to coatings, as I have said before. So I am merely asking a question as to why the wrap is allowed but not the coating. What testing was done to deem one acceptable but the other not?

joepaluch wrote:


Lower engine bay temps which cause reduced stress on the motor oil??? Thus reducing engine fatigue which increases the time between needing engine refreshes??

Am I wrong in my logic? Is the link between lower engine bay temps -> lower oil stress -> less motor fatigue wrong? If it is please tell me and let me know why. If you don't know then tell me too so I can keep digging into this for knowledge.

I hate making waves in a sport I love but I have some questions and want to learn. And I hate rules changes too but allowing wrap but no coating seems weird. And I guess that is the heart of my questions/concerns - the weirdness in allowing wrap but not coating.

I think the real answer is to not allow header wrap or coatings.

We dont really need them. Proper oil and water cooling is where it is at.

cbuzzetti wrote:


I'm in total agreement here - let's just eliminate the whole thing and be done with it. I say that we allow both, or allow neither. In the interest of the spirit of the class - lets just bail on header wrap.

cbuzzetti wrote:


We also didn't need air ducting to the air filter but that was allowed for what reason? It either didn't do anything significant and we made a rule change to appease the masses or it increased HP.

IF we are thinking about getting header wrap because we don't want to allow coating, what exactly was the reason for allowing the wrap in the first place? I would love for someone to inform me how a coating would create a performance advantage over a wrap that is already in the rules?

And if we are going to go down the path of removing things from the rules because we don't want to have rule changes, then there are quite a few things that can be looked at also.

So I think Buzzetti is on the right track. We either allow both or neither. I think we need some more hard data though before we make any change of any kind. I think we should offer up a few test cars for this decision. We can take temps of engine bays during a race or DE Day then throw on a coated or wrapped header and re take temps. For simplicities sake they will probably be on a different day but as long as the ambient temps are similar we should be ok?

Thoughts?