nuzee

iTrader: (2)

Have you guys seen this before?

http://www.designengineering.com/cry...ted_items.html

Does it work? Anybody tried it on an LS1?

onyxxtreme

iTrader: (4)

same concept as N2O
i dont see a point in it really
and the only thing interesting they said was "Dyno testing showed a reduction in intake air temperature of more than 35%"

doesnt sound like it has advantages over nitrous, to me
maybe im wrong

SapphireHawk

It says it uses liquid CO2. Doesn't C stand for carbon?
Why the hell would you want to put more carbon in your engine? How about some sugar in the gas tank while your at it.

onyxxtreme

iTrader: (4)

carbon dioxide is quite different from plain 'ol Carbon

Colonel

From what I saw, it used the CO2 to cool the object that goes in the airstream. No CO2 would actually enter the engine.

Personnally, I don't see this thing doing much but being a huge intake restriction.

jRaskell

iTrader: (1)

I agree. The concept is sound. Cool down the intake charge, cool down the fuel = CAPABLE of making more power. You'd need appropriate tuning/timing to take advantage of the added potential. However, that bulb in the intake path does look like a BIG restriction, outweighing any gains you'd be able to gain from the cooler charge. I'd really like to see independant dyno testing of these products though. Cooling the fuel charge has potential, it's not restricting anything there.

And Nitrous does so much more then cool the intake charge. Cooling the intake charge in most applications is simply a bonus effect as opposed to the primary goal (turbo and SC applications being the primary exceptions)

The CO2 intercooler injection setup has more potential then water injection as well. Downside being water is so much more available then CO2.

For the most part, these look like Ricer kits to me. They're more about cool sounding concepts then practical real world results most of the time anyways.

nuzee

iTrader: (2)

Just a thought...... twin-filter Volant intake with 2 CryO2 units stuck in each end...... LOL!

Whether or not this thing works, I like the concept. Design Engineering should add another functional option to the set-up, Fire Extinguisher!

VipZ28

iTrader: (4)

uh... guys if you read the link, this blows CO2 over an INTERCOOLER, this is intended for BOOST applications where and INTERCOOLER is used. Kinda like blowing N20 over the intercooler... the liquid's expansion to a gas releases heat, the cool gas is then blown over the fins of an INTERCOOLER, NOT into the intake.
The fuel bar there is the same theory, the CO2 is circulated AROUND the fuel line in that fuel bar.

Thank you drive through.

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

Using C02 or Nitrous on the face of an air/air intercooler does work. NX makes a kit too.

Every 10 degree drop allows you to run 1 less point of octane.

I have thought about using a C02 kit on my blown setup but it's a bit premature for me to try stuff like that.

Colonel

Blane, on that web page is both a intercooler spraybar and a cryogenic air intake (with the aforementioned bulb) that can be used for NA applications.

"Can be used on tubocharged, supercharged or naturally aspirated applications."

Thank you, please pull BACK through and read again! :p

VipZ28

iTrader: (4)

haha My bad, when I brought the link up the fuel bar and intercooler spayer was at the top of the page, DOAH! Even so, no CO2 enters the intake tract, and in that case I agree that thing looks like a big restriction.

Powellbr

Actually CryO2 does make add-ons for their kits that do allow you to cool the incoming air charge, although in the image on their site that I have pulled I've they do show it with a Turbo, also was wondering if the intercooler sprayer would work on a water to air intercooler?

jimmyblue

iTrader: (11)

Web site says lowers air temp by "up to" 50F. Here I
see someone else saying 35%. I'd say that must be on
a Fahrenheit or Celsius basis, not absolute temp - and
absolute temp is what matters, gas-law-wise. -If- you
got the purported -50F, that would be a whopping +10%
as far as any charge densification. That's equilibrium,
by the way. Which matters.

In a dynamic situation, what also matters is the fluid
time-over-target to pick up / shed heat. At high flow
you're only going to get a fraction of that ultimate
cooling. I figured it once, the other way, for manifold
heat soak. You need an awful lot of area to make up
for nil time in contact with the intercooler you so
expensively chill.

I'd bet a small amount of money that you'd be better
off spraying ice water than CO2 (if the track would let
you). Way more heat capacity per volume. Way cheap
too.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

We used C02 cooling on a car w/ a blower. Basically, there's a heat sink chunk of aluminum that the fuel can flow through in a channel next to a CO2 channel, plus an in-line sleeve that mounts in the cold air intake that C02 also flow through. A WOT switch activates a solenoid for the C02 to come on. It's all contained within hoses & the mentioned heat transfer parts & vents (exits) @ a location far away from the air intake. You don't want the C02 to get into the engine. It will cause the engine to stumble & miss. These C02 coolers do work well, especially on cars w/ forced induction.