Hmmm is it time for advancement?
11-05-2008 | 08:40 AM
#43
let me put in my uneducated $.02 in and see how far off i am.
a port can only flow so much air so i think an n20 motor is alot more limited. the direct injection thing sounds pretty good if there is nothing going back up into the intake (isn't some guys doing that now ? ) . with f/i when you force the air through the port the potential is so much greater with the same port. and billy glidden is going 6.5x but he is still WAY down on power compared to someone like lynch who is trapping 20 mph higher in a 1,000 lb heavier car, he's just using all his power and controlling it more efficiently.
a port can only flow so much air so i think an n20 motor is alot more limited. the direct injection thing sounds pretty good if there is nothing going back up into the intake (isn't some guys doing that now ? ) . with f/i when you force the air through the port the potential is so much greater with the same port. and billy glidden is going 6.5x but he is still WAY down on power compared to someone like lynch who is trapping 20 mph higher in a 1,000 lb heavier car, he's just using all his power and controlling it more efficiently.
11-07-2008 | 07:49 PM
#44
FormerVendor
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Heating the nitrous bottle is certainly not the answer. One of the major answers better performance is the ability to consistently deliver more mass (weight) of nitrous to your engine over an increment of time - measured in Lbs/sec. This is referred to as the mass flow of nitrous.
Trying to achieve this by heating your nitrous is counter productive. Heating nitrous does provide bottle pressure, but it also decreases the density of the nitrous. As long as nitrous cars keep using heat to build up their bottle pressure, we know nitrous performance will not advance much beyond its current level. Why, because even though you are replacing the nitrous bottle pressure through heating the nitrous, the amount of nitrous being pushed out of the bottle (Lbs/sec) still declines. That is why you see the decline in performance as you move down track, and continued performance deterioration was you make subsequent runs, even when you bottle pressures have recovered using a bottle heater or blow torch.
NANO's Nitrous Technology resolves this issue by managing the bottle pressure without using heat.
Trying to achieve this by heating your nitrous is counter productive. Heating nitrous does provide bottle pressure, but it also decreases the density of the nitrous. As long as nitrous cars keep using heat to build up their bottle pressure, we know nitrous performance will not advance much beyond its current level. Why, because even though you are replacing the nitrous bottle pressure through heating the nitrous, the amount of nitrous being pushed out of the bottle (Lbs/sec) still declines. That is why you see the decline in performance as you move down track, and continued performance deterioration was you make subsequent runs, even when you bottle pressures have recovered using a bottle heater or blow torch.
NANO's Nitrous Technology resolves this issue by managing the bottle pressure without using heat.
11-07-2008 | 09:48 PM
#45
The fuel part of the equation has been worked out already. By using the injector system with an SD tune using MAP and RPM (just as you would in a FI tune) you can control the fuel. As the big dry users have figured out a fuel injector atomizes fuel better than any current nitrous system.
Atomizing and oxidizing fuel is what making power is all about.
Now the part we in the nitrous community do poorly and that’s a linier and even addition of the nitrous. A direct port doesn’t work because every time the intake valve closes the runners backs up with pure nitrous it causes reversion in the intake and an uneven dispersion and enrichment of the nitrous in the intake charge.
The answer is to mix the nitrous enriched intake charge outside of the intake to insure an even mixture.
The next question is how do we make a smooth transition in the percentage of nitrous in this charge? The same way we do with the fuel. We use the same PCM parameters to operate our nitrous controls. But what controls. At this point there is no metering system made but here is my take on what would work.
In our current progressive systems we pulse the solenoids, it works poorly.
In our stock style fuel systems we pulse a solenoid (fuel injector) and it works great why. Because the fuels injectors pulse very rapidly and provide a finely atomized discharge. If our injectors become dirty our cars run like ****. We should not wonder why the garden hose style nitrous/fuel nozzles we use suck. But back on track. Four to six “fuel injection” style “nitrous injectors” in a perimeter style ring in the intake about a foot upstream of the throttle body that atomized and provided an infinitely adjustable delivery that was based on rpm and MAP would provide an even enrichment to every CFM of air that entered the engine. The stock style fuel system would do the rest.
The key is determining what percentage of nitrous enrichment your engines internals will support and providing the same enrichment throughout the rpm range keeping a constant cylinder pressure.
There is another issue involving the chemistry of the charge but ill address that another day.
Atomizing and oxidizing fuel is what making power is all about.
Now the part we in the nitrous community do poorly and that’s a linier and even addition of the nitrous. A direct port doesn’t work because every time the intake valve closes the runners backs up with pure nitrous it causes reversion in the intake and an uneven dispersion and enrichment of the nitrous in the intake charge.
The answer is to mix the nitrous enriched intake charge outside of the intake to insure an even mixture.
The next question is how do we make a smooth transition in the percentage of nitrous in this charge? The same way we do with the fuel. We use the same PCM parameters to operate our nitrous controls. But what controls. At this point there is no metering system made but here is my take on what would work.
In our current progressive systems we pulse the solenoids, it works poorly.
In our stock style fuel systems we pulse a solenoid (fuel injector) and it works great why. Because the fuels injectors pulse very rapidly and provide a finely atomized discharge. If our injectors become dirty our cars run like ****. We should not wonder why the garden hose style nitrous/fuel nozzles we use suck. But back on track. Four to six “fuel injection” style “nitrous injectors” in a perimeter style ring in the intake about a foot upstream of the throttle body that atomized and provided an infinitely adjustable delivery that was based on rpm and MAP would provide an even enrichment to every CFM of air that entered the engine. The stock style fuel system would do the rest.
The key is determining what percentage of nitrous enrichment your engines internals will support and providing the same enrichment throughout the rpm range keeping a constant cylinder pressure.
There is another issue involving the chemistry of the charge but ill address that another day.
11-08-2008 | 09:03 AM
#46
The fuel part of the equation has been worked out already. By using the injector system with an SD tune using MAP and RPM (just as you would in a FI tune) you can control the fuel. As the big dry users have figured out a fuel injector atomizes fuel better than any current nitrous system.
Atomizing and oxidizing fuel is what making power is all about.
Now the part we in the nitrous community do poorly and that’s a linier and even addition of the nitrous. A direct port doesn’t work because every time the intake valve closes the runners backs up with pure nitrous it causes reversion in the intake and an uneven dispersion and enrichment of the nitrous in the intake charge.
The answer is to mix the nitrous enriched intake charge outside of the intake to insure an even mixture.
The next question is how do we make a smooth transition in the percentage of nitrous in this charge? The same way we do with the fuel. We use the same PCM parameters to operate our nitrous controls. But what controls. At this point there is no metering system made but here is my take on what would work.
In our current progressive systems we pulse the solenoids, it works poorly.
In our stock style fuel systems we pulse a solenoid (fuel injector) and it works great why. Because the fuels injectors pulse very rapidly and provide a finely atomized discharge. If our injectors become dirty our cars run like ****. We should not wonder why the garden hose style nitrous/fuel nozzles we use suck. But back on track. Four to six “fuel injection” style “nitrous injectors” in a perimeter style ring in the intake about a foot upstream of the throttle body that atomized and provided an infinitely adjustable delivery that was based on rpm and MAP would provide an even enrichment to every CFM of air that entered the engine. The stock style fuel system would do the rest.
The key is determining what percentage of nitrous enrichment your engines internals will support and providing the same enrichment throughout the rpm range keeping a constant cylinder pressure.
There is another issue involving the chemistry of the charge but ill address that another day.
Atomizing and oxidizing fuel is what making power is all about.
Now the part we in the nitrous community do poorly and that’s a linier and even addition of the nitrous. A direct port doesn’t work because every time the intake valve closes the runners backs up with pure nitrous it causes reversion in the intake and an uneven dispersion and enrichment of the nitrous in the intake charge.
The answer is to mix the nitrous enriched intake charge outside of the intake to insure an even mixture.
The next question is how do we make a smooth transition in the percentage of nitrous in this charge? The same way we do with the fuel. We use the same PCM parameters to operate our nitrous controls. But what controls. At this point there is no metering system made but here is my take on what would work.
In our current progressive systems we pulse the solenoids, it works poorly.
In our stock style fuel systems we pulse a solenoid (fuel injector) and it works great why. Because the fuels injectors pulse very rapidly and provide a finely atomized discharge. If our injectors become dirty our cars run like ****. We should not wonder why the garden hose style nitrous/fuel nozzles we use suck. But back on track. Four to six “fuel injection” style “nitrous injectors” in a perimeter style ring in the intake about a foot upstream of the throttle body that atomized and provided an infinitely adjustable delivery that was based on rpm and MAP would provide an even enrichment to every CFM of air that entered the engine. The stock style fuel system would do the rest.
The key is determining what percentage of nitrous enrichment your engines internals will support and providing the same enrichment throughout the rpm range keeping a constant cylinder pressure.
There is another issue involving the chemistry of the charge but ill address that another day.
Wrong.Direct port is superior for the reasons that you just cited.
Airflow varies from cylinder to cylinder, specially with a long runner plastic intake and the initial hit is all over the place. This is why a DP system hits softer than a plate. The other problem is that with a stock PCM you cant tune the fuel injectors individually so the air fuel ratio's that you are scanning on a dyno or with a WB gage are just averages of all 8 cylinders even though individual cylinders could be 1/2 a point or more off. With a wet DP, you can now make jetting adjustments to correct on a per cylinder basis.
Timing adjustments by gear wouldn't be terribly difficult to make with a little creative thinking. Some clever bracketry in the shift with some micro switches setup on a fancy circuit could pull timing by using resistors to fake out the IAT. This is how I pull timing when I activate my nitrous.
As far as constant pressure is concerned in the nitrous bottle, I was doing some thinking about this very subject about 1 yr ago. I started doing some digging and found some patents on pressure referenced variable rate orifices that open as the pressure drops which would maintain uniform volume (if it actually worked in real life). My other thinking is why doesn't someone just make a pressure regulator so that you can take a bottle and get it up to say 1300 psi and have it regulated at 1000 psi. As you make your pull, the regulator opens and if you have a big enough bottle for your shot size, you should never drop 300 psi in a pass which would hold a steady 1000 psi or 900 or whatever you tune your nitrous at.
11-08-2008 | 12:53 PM
#47
Maybe you should take your revelations on the fuel system to the FI section. Im sure the FI guys will all be switching over to a direct port style fuel system after you straighten them out with your revelations.
A$$ hats like you attacking others comments are why I dont post much in this section anymore. How does it feel having your comments needlessly attacked With the ?????
A$$ hats like you attacking others comments are why I dont post much in this section anymore. How does it feel having your comments needlessly attacked With the
?????
11-09-2008 | 03:04 PM
#48
i dont think you guys understand what each othe are saying...atleast it doesnt seem this way.... kool i believe is saying he wants the fuel part atomized with and injector along with a single fogger nozzel to make a better mixture.... i think cobra thought you meant that a nozzel in front of the TB was the best way to spray nitrous through a motor....
on a thought about cobra's idea.... i know many guys account and hope for a pressure drop that way it doesnt start eating it self on the far end.... they tune he cars in hoping they get fat on the far end to keep fomr melting stuff.... we know nitrous works but the issue being we cant spray each cylinder enough with out it backing up in the intake.... some surely can figure a new invention out...
on a thought about cobra's idea.... i know many guys account and hope for a pressure drop that way it doesnt start eating it self on the far end.... they tune he cars in hoping they get fat on the far end to keep fomr melting stuff.... we know nitrous works but the issue being we cant spray each cylinder enough with out it backing up in the intake.... some surely can figure a new invention out...
11-13-2008 | 11:15 AM
#49
There are injectors being worked out that can open against a bunch of pressure. ala bottle pressure perhaps.
Some of the stock pcms do actually have ind cyl tuning capabilities also
Some of the stock pcms do actually have ind cyl tuning capabilities also
11-13-2008 | 07:13 PM
#51
TECH Regular
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
I'd like to see Glidden put a max effort LSX into that Grand Am and have at it. Nasty parts, nitrous the way he wants it, and at his current weight. I got a feeling he'd go quicker than that LSX Nova in NPS...
Just a bit...haha
Just a bit...haha
11-13-2008 | 07:19 PM
#52
[QUOTE=GrannySShifting;10474339]There are injectors being worked out that can open against a bunch of pressure. ala bottle pressure perhaps.
/QUOTE]
Maybe my idea isnt so bad after all
/QUOTE]
Maybe my idea isnt so bad after all
11-13-2008 | 08:19 PM
#53
What would be killer is a "common rail" setup like on diesels that are direct injection that support pressure up to 2000+ bar. What I would try is getting the nitrous in that injector to synch up with the fuel injector to open your DI nitrous injector when both valves are closed and before the plug fires. The fuel injector would have to be big. This would be close to a dry shot but you wouldn't have to worry about the nitrous going back into the intake manifold.
The only problem with my idea is that is would be killer for a 4 valve motor and not a 2 valve motor. This could be solved with using a foot to open both valves at the same time, very common on diesel engines.
Granny shifting, is my idea similar to what you said about high pressure nitrous injectors?
The only problem with my idea is that is would be killer for a 4 valve motor and not a 2 valve motor. This could be solved with using a foot to open both valves at the same time, very common on diesel engines.
Granny shifting, is my idea similar to what you said about high pressure nitrous injectors?
11-13-2008 | 08:41 PM
#54
some very good info
Unfortunately it boils down to a turbo setup will make more HP:cubic inch. Since the turbo guys generally have more available hp on tap it then comes down to massaging the tune and getting the car to hook.
Outlaw 10.5 racing is the perfect example of turbo dominance over N2O. For N2O cars to compete at that level they either need to be 700ci+ with 3 to 4 stages or have a much lighter car, near perfect clutch/trans and a phenomenal builder/driver.
The only way they even things out is by running 1/8 mile. Beyond that the turbo cars KILL nitrous cars on the backhalf.
Unfortunately it boils down to a turbo setup will make more HP:cubic inch. Since the turbo guys generally have more available hp on tap it then comes down to massaging the tune and getting the car to hook.
Outlaw 10.5 racing is the perfect example of turbo dominance over N2O. For N2O cars to compete at that level they either need to be 700ci+ with 3 to 4 stages or have a much lighter car, near perfect clutch/trans and a phenomenal builder/driver.
The only way they even things out is by running 1/8 mile. Beyond that the turbo cars KILL nitrous cars on the backhalf.
11-14-2008 | 12:17 PM
#55
some very good info
Unfortunately it boils down to a turbo setup will make more HP:cubic inch. Since the turbo guys generally have more available hp on tap it then comes down to massaging the tune and getting the car to hook.
Outlaw 10.5 racing is the perfect example of turbo dominance over N2O. For N2O cars to compete at that level they either need to be 700ci+ with 3 to 4 stages or have a much lighter car, near perfect clutch/trans and a phenomenal builder/driver.
The only way they even things out is by running 1/8 mile. Beyond that the turbo cars KILL nitrous cars on the backhalf.
Unfortunately it boils down to a turbo setup will make more HP:cubic inch. Since the turbo guys generally have more available hp on tap it then comes down to massaging the tune and getting the car to hook.
Outlaw 10.5 racing is the perfect example of turbo dominance over N2O. For N2O cars to compete at that level they either need to be 700ci+ with 3 to 4 stages or have a much lighter car, near perfect clutch/trans and a phenomenal builder/driver.
The only way they even things out is by running 1/8 mile. Beyond that the turbo cars KILL nitrous cars on the backhalf.
Its all pressures/pressure deltas. Nitrous stuff is much hard to keep control of the pressures at work. People blow their stuff up trying to run a 1:1 nitrous load. Thats why they run large engines and eat them up trying to double their output (just fun numbers say a 632 makes 1100 and 1900 on kits) and boost cars can triple what they make NA (say a 400" 700 hp NA and 2000 on 28#s). Ive thought about some stuff that might help you get away with more, but I cant see the big nitrous guys out there not having tried every crazy thing Ive ever thought up x 100, I dont know ****.
11-14-2008 | 12:31 PM
#56
its the fact that the cylinder is being pressurized with oxygen on a turbo/blower car... and nitrous cars "inject" oxygen... how can you expect the same HP when you're not forcing the oxygen in? only so many molecules can fit in a certain space unless its under pressure.... the more oxygen you can fit in the chamber the more fuel you can burn... the more fuel you can burn the more hp you make...
since the bottle of n20 is under so much pressure it needs to feed that pressure into the chambers... it will eventually happen just waiting on the right person to try it...
now that they are putting kits on the inside of sheetmetal manifolds its only a matter of time before some one puts a 1 way valve/reed in each runner....
since the bottle of n20 is under so much pressure it needs to feed that pressure into the chambers... it will eventually happen just waiting on the right person to try it...
now that they are putting kits on the inside of sheetmetal manifolds its only a matter of time before some one puts a 1 way valve/reed in each runner....
11-16-2008 | 03:45 PM
#57
Sorry I am just now getting back to this thread. Looks like there are some great thoughts here.
I have read a few comments I have questions or comments on to the guys making them.
VH5150,
It looks like the Cos5 is a great tunning tool for a average user looking to add a small amount of nitrous. Not really so much for the guy looking to bring large amounts of nitrous in through out the run. You really need the timming ramp to match the amount hp you are either ramping in or bringing in through stages. On another note. With the street guys in mind that are spraying 150-200 hp can you run a na tune and have the computer pull the timming when you activate the nitrous system? Or do you have to load in a seperate tune when you want to run NA vs Nitrous?
ty ty 13,
Why are you against progressively ramping in the nitrous? By progressively bringing in the nitrous wouldnt it keep the over all delivery being added at a steady rate of speed compared to suddenly introducing several disbursments into the cylinder?
I am confused by what you mean in this statement.
(what we need to figure out how to do is keep the intake runners from backing up and loading up #7.... if some one could figure out how to pressurize the cylinder with nitrous you'd have the fastest setup....)
Please explain to me in alittle more detail. I am assuming you are saying that the airflow intering the intake track during the time the valve is closed causing the chamber to overfill. As a result of the cylinders being full the air comming in the intake is being forced to #7. This being the reason why some motors run leaner on #7. Are you saying that with a directport that the cylinder is filling up when the valve is full and it is back feeding into the intake plenum and being pushed to #7?
Bald Eagle,
I think that this is one key item everyone keeps over looking. Heating the nitrous bottle is certainly not the answer. We need a steady and constant flow rate that will deliver as much nitrous as possible..
Koolrayz,
Bingo... Ofcourse this set up is not yet created. Technology has not caught up with demand for us here. If the technology was here this would be the key set up. I am on this mission! Al Jones and I were talking about this same thing before I created this thread. I particially disagree with part of what you said though. Maybe you have a point I am missing you can explain to me.
We have a great amount of tunnibility in our fuel systems. The injector delivers the fuel the most precise and best way. These injectors react very quicky. While this would be very expensive but very precise the key is in having injectors feeding both nitrous and fuel into each cylinder. There would be two ways to go here. You could have a seperate computer system that controlled its own fuel and nitrous injector or have a system that controlls the entire engine controlls. If we had a system that controlled the intire engine controll you would only need two injectors instead of three feeding each cylinder. You would need to be able to flip between a NA tune and a Nitrous tune.
The part I disagree with is placing the injectors infront of the intake like a non directport system. We have just taken away even flow distribution controll to each cylinder. The key to this will be like I stated above and directly controll the amount of mixture with both the fuel and nitrous into each cylinder.
98Z28Cobrakiller,
You are correct about needing individual cylinder tunning. It is safe to say if using the stock pcm the best option is a wet directport system. Now if you have a aftermarket computer system you can run a dry directport and the tunibility for fuel will be in the injectors. The past problems I found here for a car still wanting drivability is the injectors were so large they performed like crap NA. Now if it were a all our race car only making passes on nitrous it was great.
I am not a fan of using the IAT for timming controls.. I have not ever seen it being exactly accurate and you are limited to how much timming you can pull. I will admit this is an area I am not real knowledgable in.
As far as your pressure comment. There are already nitrous regulaters out on the market. All they do is bandaid a pressure drop issue. The key is in the Nano system.
I have read a few comments I have questions or comments on to the guys making them.
VH5150,
It looks like the Cos5 is a great tunning tool for a average user looking to add a small amount of nitrous. Not really so much for the guy looking to bring large amounts of nitrous in through out the run. You really need the timming ramp to match the amount hp you are either ramping in or bringing in through stages. On another note. With the street guys in mind that are spraying 150-200 hp can you run a na tune and have the computer pull the timming when you activate the nitrous system? Or do you have to load in a seperate tune when you want to run NA vs Nitrous?
ty ty 13,
Why are you against progressively ramping in the nitrous? By progressively bringing in the nitrous wouldnt it keep the over all delivery being added at a steady rate of speed compared to suddenly introducing several disbursments into the cylinder?
I am confused by what you mean in this statement.
(what we need to figure out how to do is keep the intake runners from backing up and loading up #7.... if some one could figure out how to pressurize the cylinder with nitrous you'd have the fastest setup....)
Please explain to me in alittle more detail. I am assuming you are saying that the airflow intering the intake track during the time the valve is closed causing the chamber to overfill. As a result of the cylinders being full the air comming in the intake is being forced to #7. This being the reason why some motors run leaner on #7. Are you saying that with a directport that the cylinder is filling up when the valve is full and it is back feeding into the intake plenum and being pushed to #7?
Bald Eagle,
I think that this is one key item everyone keeps over looking. Heating the nitrous bottle is certainly not the answer. We need a steady and constant flow rate that will deliver as much nitrous as possible..
Koolrayz,
Bingo... Ofcourse this set up is not yet created. Technology has not caught up with demand for us here. If the technology was here this would be the key set up. I am on this mission! Al Jones and I were talking about this same thing before I created this thread. I particially disagree with part of what you said though. Maybe you have a point I am missing you can explain to me.
We have a great amount of tunnibility in our fuel systems. The injector delivers the fuel the most precise and best way. These injectors react very quicky. While this would be very expensive but very precise the key is in having injectors feeding both nitrous and fuel into each cylinder. There would be two ways to go here. You could have a seperate computer system that controlled its own fuel and nitrous injector or have a system that controlls the entire engine controlls. If we had a system that controlled the intire engine controll you would only need two injectors instead of three feeding each cylinder. You would need to be able to flip between a NA tune and a Nitrous tune.
The part I disagree with is placing the injectors infront of the intake like a non directport system. We have just taken away even flow distribution controll to each cylinder. The key to this will be like I stated above and directly controll the amount of mixture with both the fuel and nitrous into each cylinder.
98Z28Cobrakiller,
You are correct about needing individual cylinder tunning. It is safe to say if using the stock pcm the best option is a wet directport system. Now if you have a aftermarket computer system you can run a dry directport and the tunibility for fuel will be in the injectors. The past problems I found here for a car still wanting drivability is the injectors were so large they performed like crap NA. Now if it were a all our race car only making passes on nitrous it was great.
I am not a fan of using the IAT for timming controls.. I have not ever seen it being exactly accurate and you are limited to how much timming you can pull. I will admit this is an area I am not real knowledgable in.
As far as your pressure comment. There are already nitrous regulaters out on the market. All they do is bandaid a pressure drop issue. The key is in the Nano system.
11-16-2008 | 03:59 PM
#58
its the fact that the cylinder is being pressurized with oxygen on a turbo/blower car... and nitrous cars "inject" oxygen... how can you expect the same HP when you're not forcing the oxygen in? only so many molecules can fit in a certain space unless its under pressure.... the more oxygen you can fit in the chamber the more fuel you can burn... the more fuel you can burn the more hp you make...
since the bottle of n20 is under so much pressure it needs to feed that pressure into the chambers... it will eventually happen just waiting on the right person to try it...
now that they are putting kits on the inside of sheetmetal manifolds its only a matter of time before some one puts a 1 way valve/reed in each runner....
since the bottle of n20 is under so much pressure it needs to feed that pressure into the chambers... it will eventually happen just waiting on the right person to try it...
now that they are putting kits on the inside of sheetmetal manifolds its only a matter of time before some one puts a 1 way valve/reed in each runner....
Correct,
This is why at some point the nitrous car will not be able to compete with the turbo guys. My statements are in no way saying we can match horse power for horse power. Im am just saying we have not hit our wall yet in the LSX based engines. We can continue to go faster with the right technology.
With Nitrous being made up of two parts nitrogen and one part oxygen getting a mass volume of nitrous flow is one key to the puzzle. The Nano system will give us an advantage over the typical two bottle set up with heaters.
On the reed valves. This may be a solution over injectors.
11-16-2008 | 06:08 PM
#60
VH5150,
It looks like the Cos5 is a great tunning tool for a average user looking to add a small amount of nitrous. Not really so much for the guy looking to bring large amounts of nitrous in through out the run. You really need the timming ramp to match the amount hp you are either ramping in or bringing in through stages. On another note. With the street guys in mind that are spraying 150-200 hp can you run a na tune and have the computer pull the timming when you activate the nitrous system? Or do you have to load in a seperate tune when you want to run NA vs Nitrous?
It looks like the Cos5 is a great tunning tool for a average user looking to add a small amount of nitrous. Not really so much for the guy looking to bring large amounts of nitrous in through out the run. You really need the timming ramp to match the amount hp you are either ramping in or bringing in through stages. On another note. With the street guys in mind that are spraying 150-200 hp can you run a na tune and have the computer pull the timming when you activate the nitrous system? Or do you have to load in a seperate tune when you want to run NA vs Nitrous?