Ok, I guess I misunderstood. I see what you are saying, but I think the
volume of NOS to normal air is rather small at WOT. But thinking about
it, as insignificant as it may or may not be, what you are talking about
can't hurt. I'm going to be a man and simply state that I don't know.
That's right, I don't know. ;-)
Most nitrous systems have enrichment systems also? Seems like they
would need it, just like turbo or blown. Maybe its the ones that don't
have enrichment or bigger injectors or something, and burn lean, that
end up doing the most damage when pushed too hard?
Marty
"Steven T. Ekstrand" wrote:
>
> I said Nitrous was air in a sense. I never called nitrous fuel, I referred
> to nitrous AND the added fuel. ????
> But it has volume which replaces the normal air that could otherwise get
> through the TB AND in a simple nitrous system the additional fuel jet is
> adjacent to the nitrous jet so fuel and nitrous are being sucked through a
> TB which was designed to only flow air. Maybe the temp drop effect can
> make up for that, I don't know.
>
> On the setup I saw dyno'd with nitrous and fuel jets placed right about the
> TB, the volume of fuel and nitrous released was amazing to see. My first
> thought was that TB which was already too small was now really being
> overtaxed. Maybe not? That was just my visual impression.
>
> -STE
>
> | Nitrous isn't 'fuel', it's 'AIR'. No carbons or hydrogens. Think about
> | it: one nitrogen and two oxygens. It like a super charger in that it
> | supplies more air burnable air. Its up to your fuel system to match
> | that with fuel for combustion. It should be upstream of the TB.
> |
> | Am I wrong here?
> |
> | Marty
> |
> |
> | "Steven T. Ekstrand" wrote:
> | >
> | > | Most Nitrous installations recommend about 6 inches ahead of the TB.
> | > | Purpose for this is to give the nitrous and fuel time to mix evenly
> | > before
> | > | hitting the intake & TB. That gives each cylinder an equal charge.
> | >
> | > This is the way I have seen it done everytime. It doesn't seem like
> the
> | > best way though to me. It would seem like you're substantially
> reducing
> | > the capacity of the TB by doing this. Instead of only flowing air, the
> TB
> | > now has to flow nitrous and the added fuel. I would think the
> effective
> | > CFM of the TB would be substantially reduced in terms of the air it
> could
> | > flow. Obviously, the whole point of nitrous is that it brings
> additional
> | > air into the combustion chamber, so maybe this isn't a big issue at
> all???
> | > I don't know.
> | >
> | > The simple carbuerated nitrous kits use a plate below the carb, why not
> do
> | > this with a TB setup as well??
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:02:10 EDT