The Mustang Forum for Track & Racing Enthusiasts

Taking your Mustang to an open track/HPDE event for the first time? Do you race competitively? This forum is for you! Log in to remove most ads.

  • Welcome to the Ford Mustang forum built for owners of the Mustang GT350, BOSS 302, GT500, and all other S550, S197, SN95, Fox Body and older Mustangs set up for open track days, road racing, and/or autocross. Join our forum, interact with others, share your build, and help us strengthen this community!

intake manifold heat insulation

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

isrboss

NFSBOSS said:
I'm a financial engineer does that count?
Not sure what's so funny about this. I don't know of anyone on this forum that removed their clutch helper spring just to pull it off just to say it felt great. Many of us have had the issue with the clutch pedal sticking. That's fact and not speculation. While removing the spring is a band-aid fix it's still a fix. The pedal assembly is identical to the GT500 except for the added spring. The spring makes the clutch pedal easier to depress. It does nothing else to for the car.
I always operate like this and I'm glad most do or we'd all still be in the stone age pushing our carts around with stone square wheels. ;)


There are many of us that are having clutch issues with no mods other than brake pads, tires and DOT 4 brake fluid. If our cars are advertised at track ready cars, RCWALP if you will, then we shouldn't have these issues at the track.

It's funny to me because it is. The humor continues when the mod comes on attempting to some how discredit all I stated. I never said what a fix for said problem was or was not, simply who know why they are doing it? Then gets better when I get broken in to parts in a post, and you say the spring is a band aid fix, but a fix. That is an empty statement and does nothing to state why the assist spring should be removed. Since the GT500 has the same everything except the assist spring, does it have the same clutch issues? I did mistakenly say road racing conditions when I meant track days, my bad. If the race teams are having the same pedal sticking to the floor issue, then are they removing the assist spring to fix it or as you say band aid fix it? Try to remember what I was referring to in my posts, the need for you to show me up and state your kind will advance us further in life is sad. You guys pull the whole motor out take it apart put it back together for all I care. I would have to think I upset some because of the replies I laugh at certain peoples behavior, and if it offended you, I suggest it my be time to grow up. Time to move on, I will just laugh in the background at the brainless things I read.
 
isrboss said:
It's funny to me because it is. The humor continues when the mod comes on attempting to some how discredit all I stated.
;D

As for the insulation under the intake and over the fuel rails it's there for NHV. As others have mentioned there's no harm in removing them.

Both the clutch and insulation issues have been discussed numerous times here on BMO over the past 2 1/2 years.
 
1,022
99
Exp. Type
HPDE
Exp. Level
10-20 Years
Texas
I removed the assist spring and since I removed it the clutch hasn't stuck to the floor any longer. On the track I don't take the car to redline everytime I shift...I usually shift around 6500 to 7000. As the fluids heated up and the car got hot the clutch would start sticking to the floor. It never occurred driving the car on the street but like I said it hasn't happened again since I removed the spring. I would say it is a bandaid fix to a larger problem but it works for now and I can still keep my factory warranty which is what keeps me from going with a better clutch or transmission. The pedal has a heavier push now but that doesn't bother me. Better than the compound bow feeling that the assist spring gives you.
 

pufferfish

Supporting Vendor
1,094
66
Maryland
time for a rant...

aside from a factory race car without a VIN, every vehicle ford sells is a compromise nightmare and certainly not the best engineered system on the planet. I am an Engineer for the automation industry, not a ford product Engineer, but I can assure you the challenges are the same. first, design for monkeys to use it...monkeys that gripe about everything and are looking for their next free handout (ie: lawsuit). second, you will NEVER simulate every real world scenario and you are guaranteed to have perfect theory ideas fail. third, deadlines are the enemy of perfection. fourth, there's never a clean sheet design, so plan on looking at a part and saying "why the hell was that designed that way?". its because it has been recycled and grafted onto over and over. its just the nature of designing anything mechanical, when you don't have the time and financial backing of NASA.

I can show you a hundred imperfectly engineered parts on a mustang. there are more than a dozen separate departments that worked to make this car a reality. and they didn't just design the perfectly engineered sub-assembly and expect it would just fit together with all the other sub-assemblies like a jigsaw puzzle. they had to compromise with the other departments to make it all work together.

now, the insulation discussion this thread was about should be less about making power and more about longevity. thermal barriers, like the one discussed, can only deflect radiated heat. that would be the heat radiated from the block valley. it cannot insulate against convection or conduction heat energy. radiated heat energy doesn't just disappear. it gets absorbed into whatever is in its path. that would be back into the block, which is a giant heat sink through the cooling system. now, the surrounding air will absorb some of this radiated heat energy, but its not very efficient at it unless its flowing. I think flowing air (even hot air) is key to any radiant insulation.
 
pufferfish said:
now, the insulation discussion this thread was about should be less about making power and more about longevity. thermal barriers, like the one discussed, can only deflect radiated heat. that would be the heat radiated from the block valley. it cannot insulate against convection or conduction heat energy. radiated heat energy doesn't just disappear. it gets absorbed into whatever is in its path. that would be back into the block, which is a giant heat sink through the cooling system. now, the surrounding air will absorb some of this radiated heat energy, but its not very efficient at it unless its flowing. I think flowing air (even hot air) is key to any radiant insulation.

Could it be that the foam, if it has air pockets works similar to how styrofoam keeps your hands cool from hot coffee? I was waiting for the point in this thread when someone would bring up conduction/convection, entropy/enthalpy, specific heat, all that thermodynamics stuff.
 
Brandon302 said:
Could it be that the foam, if it has air pockets works similar to how styrofoam keeps your hands cool from hot coffee? I was waiting for the point in this thread when someone would bring up conduction/convection, entropy/enthalpy, specific heat, all that thermodynamics stuff.

Sure. But that is part of the debate. The foam keeps your hand intake cool and the coffee engine hot. What is more important? To the dyno cowboys and quarter-milers, I expect every hp is as precious as an individual child. But to track dogs, I expect we would prefer to give-up a couple of ponies to keep the heat down. We certainly don't mind adding weight to keep things cool in the form of oil coolers, bigger oil pans (with added fluid capacity/weight), bigger radiators, etc.

I promise that no matter what, we will discover that the foam is a compromise (there is that word again) whether it be in or out of the car. Individually, we need to decide what works best for us and/or find solutions that mitigate that compromise (the product in question, gold foil, a duct to flow air through the engine valley, etc.). ;)
 

pufferfish

Supporting Vendor
1,094
66
Maryland
Styrofoam does have insulating qualities against convection and conduction energy transfer, but in this case, its irrelevant. picture your hand as the intake manifold, the coffee cup and coffee as the block. the insulation is sitting next to the cup, not around it and your hand is hovering over the top of the cup. the Styrofoam does nothing to protect your hand from the heat.
 

Grant 302

basic and well known psychic
pufferfish said:
now, the insulation discussion this thread was about should be less about making power and more about longevity. thermal barriers, like the one discussed, can only deflect radiated heat. that would be the heat radiated from the block valley. it cannot insulate against convection or conduction heat energy. radiated heat energy doesn't just disappear. it gets absorbed into whatever is in its path. that would be back into the block, which is a giant heat sink through the cooling system. now, the surrounding air will absorb some of this radiated heat energy, but its not very efficient at it unless its flowing. I think flowing air (even hot air) is key to any radiant insulation.

Nope. Look at the barrier again. It's aluminum and glass mat so it's a radiant barrier and insulator. Not a very good insulator, and it would be best if held at least an inch or more away from the intake...and then it would insulate better against convection and conduction. But as installed in the OP pics, it would be better with the foam. Cooling the intake would (for better or worse) comes from the intake charge. That of course only helps in some conditions.

Just like economists...you get two (or more) engineers in the room and you'll likely get as many opinions ;)
 

Grant 302

basic and well known psychic
pufferfish said:
Styrofoam does have insulating qualities against convection and conduction energy transfer, but in this case, its irrelevant. picture your hand as the intake manifold, the coffee cup and coffee as the block. the insulation is sitting next to the cup, not around it and your hand is hovering over the top of the cup. the Styrofoam does nothing to protect your hand from the heat.

Kindly reference my hand in the oven example ;) But I ask: would you rather have your hand in a 500 degree conventional oven or 500 degree convection oven? Removing the foam is like the convection oven.

ArizonaGT said:
I like turtles.
:) Totally irrational, but I too like turtles.
 
As said before, I am with pufferfish on this one. Oh, and I am also one of those cursed engineers! I agree that the foam in the valley (not the valve cover foam which I think most agree is only for NVH) may stop heat from migrating into the the intake manifold, giving a couple more hp, but it's at the cost of holding heat inside the engine, potentially affecting longevity.

Everything is a compromise, hp, heat, cost, etc., but I personally believe that the best scenario, FOR ME, would be to have the radiant barrier up against the bottom of the intake manifold to prevent it absorbing any heat, but also to remove the foam, install the 302s hood, and get enough airflow through the now open valley that the heat goes back to Mother Nature rather than slowly cooking my expensive motor! I hope to have this setup sometime in the not too distant future. Some may disagree, YMMV, insert cliche here, etc... ;D

Oh, and don't forget that without the data to do a full thermal model that this is all a best guess, but also that the engine management software attempts to maintain a certain heat range while operating. Therefore, this all only matters in temps and operating levels where you have exceeded the cars ability to cool itself sufficiently. In other words, for 95% of the population it's completely pointless.

Shawn
 

Grant 302

basic and well known psychic
CPTMac689 said:
Now, I can say that after removing the 2 outer pieces I have noticed a bit of intake air temp increase according to the computer.

I think you have most of the answer right here^

Why not just pull the foam and monitor your temps and report back?
 
Well, my last word on this. I posted a question because someone posted "it is there for a reason". I could only figure they spoke to a Ford Engineer at some show or track event and was told to leave it for X reason. With all the people attending these type of events I would assume someone has asked.

I did ask a person in the know from Ford and was told it is for NVH and taking it off will not hurt anything (a long time ago). Was also told it would let the engine run cooler but not a big deal 2-3 degrees. OK, not a big deal but every little bit helps when tracking and the heating of these cars.

The foam is there for NVH as I was told and holds heat in. That may be one reason it is on a street car, helping heat the engine on a cold winter morning for the guy going to work in his DD (IMHO). Other side effects may well be keeping leaves and other debris out, again MHO only.

Bottom line since I do track my car is to follow what the race teams are doing, so far that has not failed me.

and since this is a clutch spring thread, I finally had my tech pull it, took it for a drive and hated the feel. Let it alone since we were headed to the Track Guys weekend. First session out I hated it and it was replaced as soon as I came back in.
 
Removed my foam today. Even though I always felt like I was on the right side of this debate, I couldn't quite understand some of the comments being made. Hopefully, I'm the only dummy, but I had a major misconception about the foam. Even though I knew there were two pieces, I thought the pieces met, so that the whole underside of the intake manifold was insulated. That's why I thought this was a worthy debate. Now that I see that they only cover each end of the valley and all of the middle is open (now I get the convection oven comments), I can't see any good reason to keep these unless you want your Boss Mustang engine nice and quiet. Shhhh. ;)

crappy_foam_diagram.jpg

Pardon the crude diagram, but this demonstrates the location of the foam pieces.

DSC_0011.jpg

The Hidden Valley! The front piece of foam I just pulled out (I removed the intake tube and throttle body to make it easier).

DSC_0007.jpg

The rear piece of foam. I just broke it up and pulled out the pieces. I knew these would never go back and I was too lazy to remove the intake manifold. Be careful of the knock sensors and wiring, which passes through the foam.

DSC_0012.jpg

Here are the foam pieces.
 
For fun I looked up the Cobra Jet and Boss 302 intake instructions at the Ford Racing website. For the CJ intake install there it no mention of the foam pieces being removed but there are photos of the foam pieces, page 10, and you can clearly see the foam pieces in place after the CJ intake is installed, page 21. They did not reinstall the fuel rail covers, page 38. You can download the instructions at the link below.

http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=22445

On the Boss 302 instructions for a GT there is no mention of the foam pieces and none are included in the kit.

What does this mean? I haven't a clue but like Scott stated it isn't going to hurt anything removing them.
 
IMO it would make more sense to switch to meth if I was concerned with heating issues rather than the manifold insulation piece. It just seems like a more effective method than placing a piece of material designed to draw away heat from the intake manifold to gain more HP when things get hot and dropping intake temperatures by 120 degrees.. Just my 2c but Snow Performance added it to their Laguna Seca and dropped 2 tenths of a second off their 1/4 mile times as the day progressed supposedly hot lapping the car. It just seems that this is a more proven method of reducing heat to me than the heat shield.

http://www.stangtv.com/news/snow-performance-picks-up-two-tenths-on-laguna-seca-watermeth-kit/
 

Grant 302

basic and well known psychic
NFSBOSS said:
I haven't a clue but like Scott stated it isn't going to hurt anything removing them.

I don't think anyone here said it was going to hurt anything to remove the foam.

But it's funny that one member here has measured it running cooler with the foam and we have 3rd party reference from Ford that says it will run cooler too. I am assuming both of those examples to be for running around on the street. But it seems people are still doubting how I said it would work to that effect...at least on the street.

What I doubt with is that the foam is there ONLY for NVH.
 
Jimmy, you should put your post about removing the foam in the How-To, nice write up.

My second last word on this. It seemed to me that some were saying it would hurt the car by pulling the foam out, at least that is how I read it. The there was a reference to a magazine article about putting it in when adding a Boss intake to a Coyote engine. Magazines have been known to be wrong and I trust what the guys that put these car together have to say over anything else.

The point I was trying to make here is that there are many reason things are used or added to a production car and sometimes changing them is good for the car and will not hurt anything depending on how you use the car. Things like NVH and cost come to mind on production cars and I doubt few people would argue that a Tremec should have been used on the Boss rather then the MT-82, so switching to a Tremec will not hurt anything and make it a better car.

Is pulling the foam off for a few degrees difference worth it, even for one degree at the track? Maybe not for some people but considering the no-cost of doing this it was worth it to me.
 

TMO Supporting Vendors

Top