Lets talk fire suppression systems !

[CAMAROBOY69]

I put mine on the trans tunnel between the two rear 4th gen bucket seats.
You can see it in this pic from the other fire extinguisher thread. My car sees the road track quite often.

[steemin]

Adam,
Thanks for all the research and follow up pics.
I just ordered one for my car..
Scott

[CAMAROBOY69]

Awesome. I think it gives the car an extra "cool" looking factor and not to mention the piece of mind knowing the car is a little safer. I will probably bolt this one in Heathers mustang before we take it to the track next month.

[David Pozzi]

Here is one with two clamps, much safer in a car.
It uses Halon 1211, and is sold by Pegasus Racing http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/pro....asp?RecId=439
It has a 5 BC rating.

[Steve1968LS2]

Should I go 10lb or is 5lb big enough? The cylinder will be mounted in the rear seat area and I want a small footprint, plus the 5lb is less expensive.

I will be running two discharge nozzles. One to the engine and one under the dash near my knees.

I'm thinking of adding a third for the fuel cell area. Would it be better to discharge in the trunk or under the back of the car. I have a Fuel Safe unit so I'm not that worried about a fire back there but the system can have three ports, so why not.

Any advice?

The system I'm looking at:
http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku

I will also be mounting a Halon extinguisher in front of the passengers side seat.

[chicane67]

Well... Safecraft is definately my choice for a stand alone system... that is for sure.

Since your not really "running" the car in anything with class rules (as of yet) and this is just for street smarts, I think 5lbs should do for the engine and dash area alone. If you do any sanctioned stuff later, you could always add another 5lb system... or if you are just looking at doing the trunk area by itself... there is always a small automatic system.

You will want to split the bottle into three nozzles for your application. Two (two port nozzles) under the hood, 1 to each side of the engine directed to the block and oil pan seam under the headers and the third (three port nozzle)... to the dash, from the center of the tub to your legs and feet and the firewall.

I will be running 2 RS10 systems (2x10lb bottles; 20lbs total) in the 67. One to both sides of the engine and the firewall and the second uses 2 nozzles in the passenger compartment and one in the trunk.

[Damn True]

Tom,

What are your thoughts on a system such as the SPA Design AFFF setup?

[chicane67]

They work well in an enclosed environment, like that of the interrior... but AFFF doesnt fair too well if it is dispersed into an environment where there is moderate air movement, like that of being under the hood while at speed.

I feel it could be done effectively if the installation was paid careful attention to and I believe that it would have to do more with the type of nozzle and how it is, not to mention where it is directed, for it to be effective under the hood.

For the most part, it works better if the vehicle is near to or is comming to a stop... or if its at very low speed.

[Steve1968LS2]

I want a system mostly for "protection of investment", I will never hardcore race Penny.. just open track stuff.

I just don't see the logic in NOT putting a fire system into any valuable car. It's cheap insurance.

I will do like you say, two to the engine bay and one to the driver. Eventually I will add an auto-system to the trunk.

Thanks for the advice. I'm trying to get them to run a story on the install since I think it has merit. I get resistance since "the powers" think that most people don't care about a fire system. My feeling is that they just don't know that they should care and that we should teach them.

[chicane67]

I just don't see the logic in NOT putting a fire system into any valuable car. It's cheap insurance.

I will do like you say, two to the engine bay and one to the driver. Eventually I will add an auto-system to the trunk.

I get resistance since "the powers" think that most people don't care about a fire system. My feeling is that they just don't know that they should care and that we should teach them.

I couldnt agree more.

$500-600 to protect yourself and your investment... IS cheap insurance.

Maybe the "powers" to be, need to focus and publish the realm's of saftey before they really need an excuse to. I mean, dont publish it after there is an excuse to... but to become pro-active and instill the discipline to 'think' saftey from the get go. The technology of speed isnt going become an afterthought... it should be taught from the very basic level... and become second nature. Afterall, the big three spend millions on this very subject.

I dont know what anyone else think's what their life is worth... or the what the investimate entails for that matter... but the reality is pretty blatent.

[Rick Dorion]

I really wish the powers that be would be more safety proactive. Look at Autoweek on teen driver training. How can they not be socially responsible. I'm getting faint from lack of O2 on my high soapbox.

[John McIntire]

I think that this is an important subject, and that many of us aren't educated enough in it. I've seen these set ups on race cars, but not on a street car. What I think deters most guys from installing a set up like this is not the price, because it is a very wise investment, but the installation. How do you install such a system in a "street" car so that it is not so visible. I would imagine most guys wouldn't want that much of it exposed. That is why I think most of us resort to the old 2 or 3 pounder in the interior, and that gives us some peice of mind.
I'm sure you can get very creative with the install, much like a Nitrous set up, heck guys are pretty sneaky with them nowadays. I guess you just need to really think and plan it out so it blends into the car instead of sticking out like a sore thumb.
So you get my vote Steve for the article, I think that it would be very informative, and would reach a lot more enthusiasts than those that are just on the internet. Heck, how many NOS installs has your mag, and all the other mags done in the past? This should be an easy sell, you can apply some installation tips and tricks that could be used for either systems, along with system design and layout!
just my $.02

[eville]

I'd love to see an article on it. You've got me thinking too!
Also, I want that article on fuel tanks and cells.
Educate the reader, don't 'wow' us with another dyno session.

[Damn True]

They work well in an enclosed environment, like that of the interrior... but AFFF doesnt fair too well if it is dispersed into an environment where there is moderate air movement, like that of being under the hood while at speed.

I feel it could be done effectively if the installation was paid careful attention to and I believe that it would have to do more with the type of nozzle and how it is, not to mention where it is directed, for it to be effective under the hood.

For the most part, it works better if the vehicle is near to or is comming to a stop... or if its at very low speed.

Really?

So you think that a heavier than air gas (Halon) will be more effective when there is air movement than a viscous liquid?

I'm curious as to why?

Having deployed AFFF in a helo crash (outdoors, rotors still spinning) it hits and sticks.

Is it a factor of the sheer volume of the halon gas in the area dispersing the O2 and snuffing out the fire? If so, what does it do to prevent reignition if the wind is blowing or the car is still moving?

Not calling you out, just curious.

[Damn True]

I'd love to see an article on it. You've got me thinking too!
Also, I want that article on fuel tanks and cells.
Educate the reader, don't 'wow' us with another dyno session.

Ditto.

A big Bill Simpson interview would be great. Who better to get CORRECT safety information from?

[chicane67]

Really?

So you think that a heavier than air gas (Halon) will be more effective when there is air movement than a viscous liquid?

I'm curious as to why?

Having deployed AFFF in a helo crash (outdoors, rotors still spinning) it hits and sticks.

Is it a factor of the sheer volume of the halon gas in the area dispersing the O2 and snuffing out the fire? If so, what does it do to prevent reignition if the wind is blowing or the car is still moving?

Well... yeah. If you observe how each of them work and how different they are... if might make more sense to why one would work better in one application better than another. Just take a look as to how each of them are deployed, the properties of how each works and how they do their job. I believe that the oxygen displacement properties of Halon works better than a aerated foam in an active environment.

First and foremost... the following statement is the one thing that we have to remember. A 'fire suppression' system is not to put the fire out in case of one, they are to give you a few more seconds to exit the car, so instead of trying to decide where to put the nozzle so it will put out a fire, put it somewhere to just push it back enough to keep from burning YOU.

The first observation with AFFF is that it isnt a viscous liquid at the time of application. It is when it's in the cylinder... but, when it is dispersed it becomes a foam. That foam becomes lighter (closer to that of air) and it tends to get blown down stream (past the fire) and sticks... to whatever (but the system doesnt have the volume you likened to aircraft use). Which in thought, isnt such a bad thing considering that the flame propagation will be doing the same thing... it will be going down stream, for the most part. Its great if you have a catastrophic failure and oil down the front of the tub and the underside. But do you want to give the fire the time to take hold and build localized heat into a isolated area ?? I would think not. I think I would want to snuff the plume ASAP as it wouldnt lend to migration. On other thought's, there are other assoicated problems with AFFF. Upon activation, the bottle tends to freeze... which as you can imagine is a bad thing because it tends to loose vessel pressure and it will freeze the valve, the lines and the retardant itself. It also isnt very friendly to the interrior, and especially any wiring. But... the worst thing about using it in the interrior is what it does to visability. There will not be any... and it takes 1.5 times the amount of AFFF to extinguish the same fire as it does with Halon.

The scoop on AFFF (foam)... There are four available chemical makeups of AFFF for various applications but only two of them are compatible for our use. The first two are "Low-expansion" foams, that are foams with expansion rate lower than 20 times. Foams with expansion ratio between 20-200 are medium expansion. The low-expansion foams, eg. AFFF, are low-viscosity, mobile, able to quickly provide coverage of large areas. The third is "High-expansion" foam. HEF has an expansion rate over 200 is suitable for cases when an enclosed space, eg. a garage/shop/hangar, has to be quickly filled. And lastly, "Alcohol-resistant" foams contain a polymer that forms a protective layer between the burning surface and the foam, preventing the foam breakdown by alcohols present in the burning fuel. Alcohol resistant foams should be used in fighting fires of fuels containing oxygenates, eg. MTBE, or fires of liquids based on or containing polar solvents. These are NOT non corrosive and can eat wiring and interrior. It can also brake down and corrode aluminum (which would require the use of SS for discharge tubing).

Halon on the other hand, has far more 'Pro's and far less 'Con's than AFFF. First and foremost, it is more efficient pound for pound. It is considered a "clean agent". A clean agent does not extinguish by smothering (as is foam's goal), but it displaces oxygen, and inhibits the chemical chain reaction. They are labeled clean agents because they do not leave any residue after discharge. There are two available chemical makeups of Halon for our intended use. Halon is a liquefied, compressed gas that stops the spread of fire by chemically disrupting combustion. So basically we have 1211, being a liquid streaming agent gasifies under normal atmospheric conditions, and 1301, a gaseous flooding agent. Both leave no residue and are remarkably safe for human exposure. Halon is most effective for flammable liquids and electrical fires (rated B:C) and is electrically non-conductive and is also non corrosive. The biggest problem with Halon is... that there isnt much of it left at an affordable price, for too much longer. And then there are the tree huggers...

Lets think about this for a minute. What are the three main goals in fire prevention/containment ??

• Life safety (your own)
• Property protection (your investment)
• Continuity of operations (making sure it does what it need to do without effecting anything else, like killing you)

All you really, really want to do is... get out alive and unharmed. If you look at motorsports over the past 25 years... there has been one stellar performer when dealing with fire situations. If you go to other boards that have a common use for a supression system like that of Corner Carvers, Rennlist, the Bimmer racing sites, the Landspeed cats... so on and so on... there is a common compound used... and it is Halon. That should say something, I would think...

I am not saying that AFFF couldnt be successfully employed. In fact, I think it could be if the installation was paid attention to... with the only exception being inside the interrior. I would love to hear anyones elses experience with any system in question. This is a subject that cant be discussed enough...

[John McIntire]

Damn man! what are you? the fire marshall??
Great info, I never heard of AFFF, but have heard good things about the Halon, especially the no residue part.
We'll have to wait and see what Steve has in store

[Steve1968LS2]

I ordered a 5lb halon system (the RS). Two nozzles to the engine bay and one under the dash.

I'm trying to decided on the standard pull activation or a push type deal. Going to mount the cable in dash where the cig-lighter use to be.

Also bought a 2.5lb hand held halon bottle that I will build a bracket for. It will mount to the front of the passengers side seat.

Eventually I will take the advice and mount an automatic bottle in the trunk. For now this will do.


Hey, isn't there a breathable Halon on the market now?

[chicane67]

I ordered a 5lb halon system (the RS). Two nozzles to the engine bay and one under the dash.

I'm trying to decided on the standard pull activation or a push type deal. Going to mount the cable in dash where the cig-lighter use to be.

Also bought a 2.5lb hand held halon bottle that I will build a bracket for. It will mount to the front of the passengers side seat.

Eventually I will take the advice and mount an automatic bottle in the trunk. For now this will do.


Hey, isn't there a breathable Halon on the market now?

Push or pull... good question. I say pull. The reason I think this... depending on where the mount is, it is easier to pull something when you are strapped into the seat than it is to push something forward. Where you mount the handle is a pretty important consideration. I myself would mount it on a bracket in between the seat and tunnel or near the stick somewhere so that you can get to it without having to unstrap yourself.

Good call on the 2.5lb handheld. That should be considered the bare minimum for all street driven vehicles in my opinion.

Breathable Halon. BIG subject... lots of talk going on about this. Halon 1211 and 1301 will extinguish a fire at about a 5% concentration. The difference between the two agents is that Halon 1211 becomes toxic to humans at about a 2-2.5% concentration and Halon 1301 becomes toxic at about 9% concentration. Obviously, you can see why Halon 1301 is perfered, however, use of Halon 1211 would benifit in high heat environments. Also, Halon 1211 can be better when mounting in a very hot location such as on top of the exhaust system. Halon 1301 will expand more rapidly than Halon 1211 and therefore it can have a tendency to over-pressurize the cylinder. I would not really worry about the toxicity levels unless you were sitting in a closed compartment with a full ten pounds released into it... for more than about 5 minutes. Obviously, if you pull the handle... you WILL not be in that compartment for more time than it take you to get out.

There is also a couple other 'replacement' materials that are worth looking into. The biggest player is "FE36" by DuPont. The three others are FX-400 (FireX plus), FM200 and CEA-614. The FX-400 is somewhat new and still hasent taken a real hold yet, but it look promising. Its done well enough that it is now excepted by the NHRA as the "Official Fire Supression Product". Both the FM200 and CEA-614 have taken a slide in the industry for unknown reasons to me... but the FE36 is what is taking over for Halon in 2008 by the sanctioning bodies. In fact... by 1/1/08 all SFI rated systems shall be FE36 (or equivalent Halon replacement) and that pretty much closeses the door for Halon in the racing industry.

The news on this is that a 10 pound Halon system can be refilled with FE36... and, depending on how old a 5 pound system is will determine if it can be refilled. If the cylinder is 4 inch diameter then yes... a 3.5 inch diameter... no. If you are using this on the street or unless your system has an SFI sticker... don't worry about it. Halon will be around for many years and is still considered a better agent than FE36. It is true however, that you will need 1.5-1.8 times quanity of FE36 vs Halon to extinguish the same fire. That fact currently elludes to that all the sanctioning bodies are ignoring this at this time. Well see how this pans out shortly as the SFI and bodiy rules and regs will have to be defined by then.

[chicane67]

So Steve... do ya think the power that be, are gonna bite on doing an install article ??