Thanks for your post Alan,
I agree on some points, however, N2O has been tested for many years probably
longer than the SC, so, that point is not valid. N2O to excess is bad, so
is too much boost. After all the postings, if you think the SC is a no
frills way to increase power, why no ask those who have actually battled the
pitfalls, there are many. Anyway, power is power, normally or artificially.
Both have their good and bad points, I simply say N2O is more economical
choice. Points taken.
VLAD
96 Indy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Alan Short
Sent: Sunday, December 06, 1998 1:54 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: [Fwd: DML: Superchargers vs nitrous]
Nitrous isn't for everyone, too much stuff to do to run it. Fill a
bottle, arm a switch, rebuild a solenoid, bla, bla. No way can an
average consumer deal with that. S/C is easy to run, especially when the
factory installs, tests, de-bugs, and warranties it. Now, go in the back
yard and look at your stock vehicle and decide which one your gonna use.
Many thousands and no r/d for a SC or many hundreds to go as fast or
faster with N20. But, either way, N20 and SC are both bold moves with a
stock motor designed to crank a whopping 250 hp. Both are froght with
unknown pitfalls and after all the discussions, I'm not sure I want or
need either one. Alan S.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:11:23 EDT