Opinion needed - Undercoating?

[Brenden]

I agree with all of this. Still more I agree with @Brenden's suggestion regarding the use of sand.

But at the risk of pointing out the obvious, salt, for all its corrosive effects, does something sand can't: lower the freezing temperature of water and turn ice into a liquid. This no doubt causes less vehicular injuries and fatalities.

I would love to hear of less corrosive ways to deal with ice. By no means am I saying they don't exist. In fact I would love someone with more knowledge than I have in this subject area to educate me/us on reasonable substitutes for melting if they exist.

The issue is its not being used to remove ice. Its getting put out for standard snow, for rain, and even put out a head of storms. Blatantly wasting resources and damaging the environment.

Sponsored

 

[LostWoods]

If you do it, use a temporary one like Krown that has to be done each season. These are waxy/oily sprays that adhere to the exterior paint of the frame and don't allow any ingress as long as it's cleaned and coated completely. The problem with the rubberized and other "permanent" ones is that they tend to pull off over time (very similar to powdercoat) when damaged from road debris and use and those points allow water to seep in. It will get trapped between coating and frame and you'll never realize how fucked it is until it's too late.

 

[OldGuyNewJeep]

Should I plunk down $465 to have my underbody rust protected?
I live in Ohio so get the usual salt on the roads in the winter.
I plan on keeping the Jeep indefinitely and probably 6 or so years down the line consider a Hemi swap if that is still an option.

No

 

[OldGuyNewJeep]

I haven’t done it and don’t understand why so many people do.

For the same reason they waste money on cold air intakes and oil catch cans.

$465 could buy me a nice Milwaukee cordless tool that would last a lifetime.

 

[Gee-pah]

The issue is its not being used to remove ice. Its getting put out for standard snow, for rain, and even put out a head of storms. Blatantly wasting resources and damaging the environment.

Fair point. You have cause to think it's used too quickly and frequently.

Municipalities lay this stuff down; themselves governed by politicians.

And many politicians have learned from the lessons in '69 I suspect, even the don't know the event and have only been passed down this wisdom, that if snow removal doesn't win elections, failure to remove it loses them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_1969_nor'easter#:~:text=Following the storm, then-mayor,dealing with the snow adequately.&text=The mayor was booed by,for the next mayoral election.

 

[r.stevens]

$465 could buy me a nice Milwaukee cordless tool that would last a lifetime.

I do love my Milwaukee tools. Have decided no on the undercoating and will use the money instead to build my roof rack.

 

[LostWoods]

I agree with all of this. Still more I agree with @Brenden's suggestion regarding the use of sand.

But at the risk of pointing out the obvious, salt, for all its corrosive effects, does something sand can't: lower the freezing temperature of water and turn ice into a liquid. This no doubt causes less vehicular injuries and fatalities.

I would love to hear of less corrosive ways to deal with ice. By no means am I saying they don't exist. In fact I would love someone with more knowledge than I have in this subject area to educate me/us on reasonable substitutes for melting if they exist.

The problem is that salt only does so much and the volume of salt required to make any sort of significant difference below about 20F is astronomical (really, it falls off like a rock after about 28F). It makes some sort of sense in places that see infrequent snow/ice and dance just a bit below the freezing line. The problem is that the externalities aren't justified in places like the midwest or NE where it gets cold and stays cold for months on end well below the point where salt is effective.

 

[Gee-pah]

I'm lost sir. If the corrosive effects of salt are something we can both agree with and set aside for a minute, do we not also agree that salt does, to some extent reduce road slipperyness--granted in deference to @LostWoods point about its effectiveness dropping off substantially with each degree below freezing that ambient temperature gets.

And doesn't that reduce accidents, if not non-insurance compensated body work on parts that have seen the effects of that salt?

I'm not disagreeing with you; I'm just confused as to your point.

Sponsored