[TR] (no subject)

[marty sukey]

Kind of maybe.  Without independent lab testing directly comparing the two I
don't know what the actual difference is but I believe JetHot has been
marketing their product for years touting some of the benefits you listed for
ceramic coating. Ceramic might do a better job of it but I don't think you can
rule JetHot out as a player in the heat insulator game.  For 99% of the
Triumph community JetHot is probably a viable option.  I've been satisfied
with it on my performance engine. I've been wrong before though :)

Marty


> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 06:55:15 -0500
> From: tedtsimx at bright.net
> To: triumphs at autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [TR] (no subject)
>
> Cosmo and list. I believe this discussion thread started about ceramic
> coating. JetHot, good company, is known for its quality
> coating.This,however, is normally an "appearance" coating. Nice finish
> and even has some self-healing properties if it is scratched. However,
> ceramic coating serves a different purpose. Ceramic coating is
> designedt o retain heat inside the header/manifold/exhaust. Keeping the
> heat inside makes the exhaust gasses flow faster -a good thing when you
> are trying to make power. A side perk is heat retention inside the
> header means less heat under the hood (bonnet). Ceramic coating gives a
> nice external appearance but not quite as nice as the JetHot or similar
> non-ceramic coatings. Ted