From what I have understand each molecule of Nitrous bonds more oxygen. Something like 3 to 1. So therefore, you'd need a 3 times more oxygen than Nitrous to equal the same burning capacity. Not to mention releasing Nitrous gas cools the intake charge while comressing air heats it up. I'm not a chemist, but this is what I've been told and it makes a lot of since to me.

To the poster, I'm sure it could be done, but who cares. Is it the optimum configuration for a boosted car? I seriously doubt it.

Mike

 

just get some 325/50/15 M/t drag radials Vince and that' bitch will hook. When ya gonna bring that car to Orlando?

 

I cant run 15 inch tires. I am coming up there as soon as work slows down. The competition between my company and Verizon is great. We are upgrading our entire network to compete. I work 60 plus hours a week and it is burning me out.

 

Awesome man, hang in there take advantage of the OT while its there, maybe 17 inch Mickey's will do the trick? Caveman aka Dave with the Red Formula has a set and let me tell you that is a gummy sticky tire, so sticky its hard to get it off your car!

 

no traction on a small nitrous shot...yet you want booost lol

anyways think about the RX car IFlyubye car. D1 blower car with 10/1 compression 346 on pump gas. just short of 600 rwhp on a very safe tune.

 

Yes it can be done but if you have the choice with a forced induction car, drop the comp. and turn the boost up.

 

I have some 17 inch MT's They do hook for sure. I will keep you posted on it..

 

Less compression and more boost makes more power than medium/high compression and less boost. Doesn't matter if you're trying to make power on 93 Octane or 116 Octane.

 

Yeah, but the 12.3:1 motor made 200 HP more than an 8.5:1 compression motor at the same pulley size, so nyah!

While Nitrous does cool down the intake charge, once it gets into the combustion chamber the result is the same; higher cylinder pressures, creating the need for more fuel and more octane. You're right, a flat top piston is much less prone to detonation and produces a better flame front than a dome top, but I'll bet you money that his 11.7:1 408 is using a flat top piston. And 1 point in compression is give or take 3-4% in total power output, not 15.

I still believe a high compression forced induction setup can run very well on the street. A friend of mine just finished a mod motor ford car to run PSCA heavy street, it's 10.5:1 compression and we've had it up to 32-33 pounds of boost on C16 so far. NMRA renegade cars are fairly limited by the blower's (YSi is about the biggest, and they must run 8-rib serpentine, and NO intercoolers) so they have found other ways to make power. Can you guess what that is? Higher compression. Some around 10.5:1, and pushing over 30 pounds of non intercooled boost into their motor. I don't believe nitrous "loves" high compression, because which cars do you always see with burnt pistons at races? The ultra high compression nitrous guys. Rarely do you see a blower/turbo guy destroying pistons. Nitrous is just as finnicky in a high boost race gas setup as a blower/turbo is, in my humble opinion.

 

Well fellas I am one of them ford boys (not the one he talked to)

I run 10.25.1 comp in my 308 with 10psi Non intercooled 11.8AF with 20* total timing at WOT

This mustang runs fairly high comp around 10.25.1 and 28+ lbs of boost
They are a few local guys here in town who won the WFC this year.

http://inductionweb.com/UndrPrsr2.mpg


But like said earler there are alot more vairbles involved!!
And some times its alot harder to hit 35-40 lbs of boost vs just uppin the comp just a little. To get the same power.

But in most cases 8.5.1 comp with alot of boost is IDEAL

 

If this were the case how come every peformance car and drag racer out there is not running 2.5.1 comp and 100+psi of boost

Because its not how you get there, Its who gets there first!!!! Thats why i drive a FORD (flame away) lol!!

 

Very cool video.

But...what are the advantages of running that high of compression? What are the "variables"?

Forgive me if the answer is obvious. I am learning.

 

Awesome vid man! That thing must be fun to drive

 

well im convinced now, i gotta go get me a F4R blower, and some 16:1 domed pistons, and run about 30psi..

I wont even cheat and use alky, just 93 octane, and some 42lbhr injectors, whatll you all say?

ed

 

Good luck with that, I hope your budget is REAL big lol.

Evil...obviously with in limits. The thing is...there isn't much room for error on a setup like that if it doesn't knock retard quick enough (assuming you have knock sensors) or if a compressor surges with a turbo. Also...it does come down to a lot of piston and head design. Ever stop to think that perhaps the heads on a 5 liter are better suited for a good amount of quench? I know a few people on here that are running stock internals and on P1SCs that have a 10# pulley on there and a good tune that run on pump gas with no problems, but as I said above in this post...very fine line.

 

Maybe you could run that kind of comp. with a supercharger but you would have a hard time spoolin a turbo!!

 

I wanna see some more footage of your car Vince!

 

Yeah, but the thing is a 5 litre isn't better at resisting detonation than an LS1. He has an 11.7:1 N/A motor that he says runs on pump gas, atleast occasionally. An 11.7:1 302 would eat itself up on pump gas.

 

Blown Nitro motors need lower compression because of the sheer amount of fluid entering the cyl. Nitro runs at around a 2-1 AF and can even be considered a mono propellant. It's possible to hydraulic lock the cyl so they need space for all that fluid volume. Should not even be remotely compared with a gas burning motor.

The ls1 and Ford heads are actually pretty similar. But if we are to say the ls1 chamber is superior and burns faster, that just means it's possible to run the same high compression with less chance of detonation.
The slower a chamber burns the more chance of detonation from the end gasses.
Steve

 

I've always been under the impression it was exactly the opposite. High octane fuels are good because they burn slower, and that's desirable to prevent detonation. So why would a chamber design that burns slower increase the chance of detonation?