Glyptal paint

[John_Kunkel]

It also bears consideration that by smoothing the walls of the block, whether through Glyptal, paint, or grinding/sanding, you are removing the porous structure of the iron. Removing the porousness means there is less total surface area to disapate (sic) heat, which may results in higher coolant temps as that system has to work harder to remove the heat.

What if the pores in the casting are clogged with soot? As they are after a short time in service.

[Ghoste]

So does it help cooling or hinder?

[John_Kunkel]

Obviously there's no real answer...just opinions. Like all other opinionated subjects it's up to the individual to decide.

[Ghoste]

I tend to disagree John.  I would say that there appears to be no certain answers on this particular forum at this particular time but it hardly means that the subject has no answers and only opinions.  For that matter, most of our topics are the solicitation of other opinions so even at that I'm quite okay with it.

[elacruze]

 

A GREAT NEW QUEST!

Somewhere, somebody knows!

TO CAMELOT!

[HPP]

I would say none of us on here have the means or desire to dig deep enough in to this over a long enough time to to provide a definitive answer on all the differing aspects of ts use. If you google the topic, you can see any number of differing opinoins on other boads dedicated to restoration and racing about its benefits and drawbacks.

I also think it is safe to say that since Glyptal has been around for a very long time, back to the model T days, that now days there are certainly more choices for coatings out there that do exceed Glypatl's ability. As a thermal barrier, there are new ceramic compounds that provide greater benefit to heat management as well as oil shedding coatings that will speed oil drainback. In its day, Glyptal was probably the best all around chocie for a variety of applications. Now maybe not so much.

[John_Kunkel]

I tend to disagree John.  I would say that there appears to be no certain answers on this particular forum at this particular time but it hardly means that the subject has no answers and only opinions. 

No problem, I'll patiently wait for that definitive laboratory-type experiment wherein the pros/cons of using interior paint are finally decided to everybody's satisfaction....but I won't hold my breath. Blue doesn't match my hair color.

[Ghoste]

Whatever.  I won't hold mine either but I'll still keep my ears open to finding out.

[HPP]

Plenty of research has been done on modern coatings and their benefits. IMO, Glyptal was simply the predesesor to these types coatings and was the best option available at the time. I think some of the voodoo of using Glyptal spilled over into the mantra of simply using paint as a more readily available and less expensive option and thus the urban legend was created.

[Ghoste]

That makes sense, thanks HPP.

[Tom Q]

I have been doing research for years. 

You have to get off the porch  and behind the wheel


Glyptal seals the non machine surfaces to aid in oil return and reducing contamination.  Oil that returns faster means more in the pan and less flying around creating windage.  If you have a mopar performace engine book you can look up what they say about glyptal.  Those guys who wrote those books might know something about a V8 mopar.

In a small block the bottom of the intake is also a good place to coat with glyptal

[RallyeMike]

 

All right. Enough voodoo backyard bench racing. Somebody step up and post some empirical data on the use of products like Glyptal. I can't find anything but opinions. I would like to be educated.

If you have a mopar performace engine book you can look up what they say about glyptal.

I have read my three Mopar Performance engines books cover to cover, and I don't ever recall them talking about Glyptal. For giggles I pulled them off the shelf and spent some time going over the block preparation and oiling chapters in all three and they don't have word ONE on the subject. Granted I did not re-read every word - if it's in there at all they sure didnt find it important enough to make it prominent. You have me curious if perhaps it was an older recommendation that they have since dropped. I would love to see what they have to say and if there is any substance behind it or just more voodoo bench racing. Please tell us what is the specific source of your data from a Mopar Engine book?

For reference, I have consulted the following:
1. Mopar Oval Track Modifications 3rd Edition PN P5249959 (my favorite)
2. Big Block R=Rb Engines PN P4876825
3. Mopar Engines 9th Edition PN P5249704

Oil that returns faster means more in the pan and less flying around creating windage.

Glyptol or not, the oil still makes one trip from the top to the pan. It still has to make one trip to get past a bunch of spinning parts moving a HELL of a lot faster than whatever speed the oil travels at. If you want to have any real effect on windage you scrape the crank or if you are serious you provide alternate paths for some of that oil to keep it from dripping on the rotating parts. Glyptal has no significant effect on windage.

[Ghoste]

But if it has no effect on windage, why use it?

[RallyeMike]

The only reasonable argument that can be made is to seal pores so impurities stay locked in the casting. Not a significant benefit, but for those looking for the N-th degree of performance, have at it.

The rest is all bunk, tales handed down from bench race to bench race, however I'm always open to being proven wrong. Even the Glyptal manufacturer makes few claims other than corrosion protection and electrical resistance.

[elacruze]

I have a 1984 printing of the Direct Connection Engines manual, I'll have a look in there for a reference.

I did find one statement while digging around the internet that made some sense-on a flathead site-it was a scanned page out of the 30's or 40's that said something like '...then paint the block to prevent rusting inside and out'. I figured it possible that Glyptal would become a coating of choice because it wouldn't dissolve or flake off the inside of the block like the paint they had available back then.

Just a little more smoke and mirrors to ponder. 

[John_Kunkel]

All right. Enough voodoo backyard bench racing. Somebody step up and post some empirical data on the use of products like Glyptal. I can't find anything but opinions. I would like to be

You ain't gonna find empirical data, only opinions. This thread is just like the religious/political ones that preceded it, state an opinion and wait for the conflicting opinions with nary a single fact to be found.

Even the Glyptal manufacturer makes few claims other than corrosion protection and electrical resistance.

That's irrelevant, you'll find lots of examples where a product is successfully used for a purpose it was never intended for. Why would a manufacturer expose themselves to liability for endorsing a use with so little potential profit?

[Ghoste]

You ain't gonna find empirical data, only opinions. This thread is just like the religious/political ones that preceded it, state an opinion and wait for the conflicting opinions with nary a single fact to be found.

Geez John, then don't particiapte in it.   I apologize for asking a question you so disapprove of.

[John_Kunkel]

Touchy...touchy!! I don't "disapprove" of the question, in fact I think it's a good question. I merely pointed out the fact that there's not likely to be any factual information based on emperical data.

[HPP]

Factual or empirical? I think we have a fair amount of empirical info here. Not sure we have much factual info though.

However, I stick by my assertion that Glyptal was a catch all, voodoo product in its day that has been surpassed by more modern products that are more specialized in their application, ie. cermaic thermal barriers, oil shedding barriers, or dry film lubricating films. All these new products have proven their effectiveness in specialized, performance applications, but the gains are of such narrow margins and the labor of application so high that they do not justify their use by OEMs. However, in a competition application where items are built meticulously and almost individually, they have a fair amount of merit.

I also think the since guys like Smokey Yunick and Carroll Shelby used Glyptal demonstrates that there was a reasonable belief in its effectiveness for use in competition applications back in the late '60s. Given these two guys had a tendancy to try anything and everything to create an advantage, I'd be willing to bet they had some factual data to back up its use, but I can't prove this and the fact that they are racers and successful racers tend to be pretty tight lipped about stuff that works for them, we may never know. However, as they used it and their reputations grew, enough people saw the empirical advantage of doing things like these two did, so Glyptal usage become more widespread and eventually morphed in to this belief that it is some wickedly awesome product. I would imagine the reality is somewhat less so.

But, that is just my opinion because I have no facts to back it up.

[Ghoste]

I apologize John.  I misunderstood the comparison to political and religious threads as a sign of disdain.

[Bobs69]

I've never heard of it.  BUT it sounds like one of those things someone would brag about just to say their engine has it done and show you a picture to prove he's got something better then you.

[John_Kunkel]

Factual or empirical? I think we have a fair amount of empirical info here.

Sorry to belabor the subject through linguistics but I always thought the word empirical denotes information gained by means of observation, experience, or experiment. Nobody here has put forth any of those that attest to the benefit of using Glyptal but many, including myself, "believe" it has benefits based on simple logic. (logic which varies with the individual)

Have any of the "modern products" you mention been lab tested in the internal combustion engine environment? If so what were the results? Details?

[HPP]

Reviews on the subject;
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/hrdp_0612_engine_coatings/index.html
http://www.circletrack.com/techarticles/general/139_0307_engine_coating_overview_guide_how_to/index.html

Providers of product;
http://www.polydyn.com/
http://www.performancecoatings.com/enginecoatings.html
http://www.hpcoatings.com/hpc_antifriction.aspx
http://www.techlinecoatings.com/Engine.htm
http://www.swaintech.com/

[elacruze]

I still see absolutely zero evidence or claims attached specifically to *any* oil shedding coating applied to the lifter valley/oil returns.
I'm sticking with 'it won't rust and it won't come off'.

[John_Kunkel]

I still see absolutely zero evidence or claims attached specifically to *any* oil shedding coating applied to the lifter valley/oil returns.

You noticed that too?