![]() |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
![]() |
TonyA |
![]()
Post
#1
|
Nachmal ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 620 Joined: 17-November 16 From: Hilltown PA Member No.: 20,596 Region Association: North East States ![]() ![]() |
What does everyone use to repair floor tar sound deadening material. I have some popping up very little rust the cause of course. I am removing a small amount to good sound completely rust free areas and want to restore that to like new appearance. Any suggestions?
|
![]() ![]() |
JeffBowlsby |
![]()
Post
#2
|
914 Wiring Harnesses & Beekeeper ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 9,045 Joined: 7-January 03 From: San Ramon CA Member No.: 104 Region Association: None ![]() ![]() |
School me on this please. Anyone have any actaul technical data indicating comparative acoustical performance of the original to new membranes? Not anecdotal diatribes.
I really dislike the look of the newer sticky membranes (with all the logos!) and they are so thin, its hard to beleive they do much. The original asphalt based mat at least has some thickness and mass to it. The original mat can be removed easily enough (with dry ice and scraping), I cannot imagine how the sticky membranes could be removed without a torch creating serious fumes and possible metal warpage |
Superhawk996 |
![]()
Post
#3
|
914 Guru ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 7,410 Joined: 25-August 18 From: Woods of N. Idaho Member No.: 22,428 Region Association: Galt's Gulch ![]() ![]() |
School me on this please. Anyone have any actaul technical data indicating comparative acoustical performance of the original to new membranes? Not anecdotal diatribes. I really dislike the look of the newer sticky membranes (with all the logoso!) and they are so thin, its hard to beleive they do much. The original asphalt based mat at least has some thickness and mass to it. The original mat can be removed easily enough (with dry ice and scraping), I cannot imagine how the sticky membranes could be removed without a torch creating serious fumes and possible metal warpage I’ve posted on this in the past so not going to do the whole thing here. Many books have been written on the subject of automotive NVH. Can’t do it justice in a short post. ![]() What I can share is my experience having worked in that world for many years. The OEM asphalt is the oldest and least effective solution. Liquid Applied Sound Damping (LASD) has largely replaced Bitumen sheeting. It is lighter, and more effective. ![]() Constrained layer damping (CLD) like Dynamat is generally more effective than LASD but is costly. In OEM use it is more selectively targeted due to cost. Dynamat has sound reduction data on their website (unlike others). Unfortunately I’m not quickly finding a chart comparison of LASD VS CLD. If you don’t believe CLD damping is very effective you are mistaken. Here is a quick video. Notice how little butyl was applied and how big the difference is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK2GAce4vCw Data on Dynamat - hard to find comparable data for the Amazon competitors ![]() All OEMs have entire departments that are focused on NVH and reducing noise. The field has progressed immensely since 914s were in production. Better NVH can be obtained with modern materials vs the heavy mass damping that was used in 1969. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd September 2025 - 11:26 PM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |