VIl

To koolrayz:
I`m not at home now, but when I will be there I would surely find this #, and then post it here.

"stability at low temps"

It is stable at low temp`s, especially until it did not reach the combustion chamber, because there is no catalyst placed. It is stable in the combustion chamber with temp`s less than 200 C.

"By lowering the temperature to the levels your speaking of the oxygen would release become unstable and detonate prematurely"

It will never detonate prematurely unless the oxigen level will not reach some point (I don`t remember, somewhere near 50%).

VIl

Guys, your doubts have no base: we are driving with this device for more than a year, and our clients too. By the way, if nitrous is considered to be the cheapest power tuning, then our offer is more profitable, because giving up to 1/3 of N2O power it costs less than 1/10 of average NOS kit.

To koolrayz:

Please print your patent #'s so we can look them up.
My international (and U.S. too) patent is pending, but international search has passed succefully. My international application for patent number is PCT/RU 03/00299. I have got a Russian patent already, but it`s senceless to send you it`s number and materials.

BigPlanTransAm

the nitrogen, once released, helps to carry excess heat(after combustion has taken place)out of the cylinder. thats another reason you run N20 instead of pure oxygen because you can make more power without melting down your engine.

and for VII, do you have any before/after dyno graphs? also, the corrosive properties worry me, how long have you been running this on peoples cars, has anyone ever had damage to the engine from too much corrosion?

VIl

To BigPlanTransAm:
There is no corrosion! One of our clients had to open his engine to make some tuning. He saw no depositions and no damage to the block, pistons, etc. He uses this car only for racing, running a 50 shot (of my N2O system) on a 150 hp car only with my plugs. None of my clients had recieved any damage to engine because of plugs.
I do have graphs. Check out the tests made by NX: www.sokolniki.com/nos/e_pict_am.html

383LQ4SS

iTrader: (33)

VII...I looked at the graphs...unless I am just not looking at them right...I see a 9.1 hp gain with the plugs. Thats not taking into account the 6 hp loss NA. You can make the arguement for a 15.1 gain. Either way.....thats not very convincing so far.

Please provide more real world testing. I am not trying to put your product down at all....but you will have to show that this plug works conclusively before anyone would want to purchase it.
Or...show that there may be other benefits as well...like the abilty to run a bit more nitrous before the onset of detonation...something like that.

We are all skeptics here as you can tell...lol

VIl

To 383LQ4SS:
"thats not very convincing so far"

Well if 25% of N2O shot is not convincing, then nitrous is not convincing, everything is not convincing...

"Please provide more real world testing"

Should I pay for this?

"show that there may be other benefits as well"

Isn`t power a great benefit?
You can save N2O with these plugs, for example, having the same power.

70Stang

iTrader: (2)

Yes. You should.

383LQ4SS

iTrader: (33)

Dont get defensive...Im really trying to see the benifit. And also see more evidence. But the testing was a 9.1 rwhp difference. That could be the difference between 1000 psi in the bottle and 1025 psi in the bottle.

I would love for your product to come through and have conclusive evidence to show it works. I am alwasy willing to explore new ideas.

Please do more testing with as much data as possible.
Bottle pressure
ATAP logs
ambiant conditions
more runs so you can get consistant averages...etc ...etc.

VIl

But I don`t want to.

VIl

Well, I`ve done much tests on my own nitrous system, which gives constant pressure of 1.5 MPa (15 atmospheres) and recieved approximately 30% of N2O shot.
As you can see the conditions could not change for such a short period of time (1 hour of tests).
I have done at least 10 runs on different cars and result remains the same. I can even publish some of them.

The tests had 9.1 hp difference, you say, but there was only 60 hp shot on this car. If we could have a 200 shot, surely, we would have 40 hp difference, for example.

Fast94bird

By the numbers of 63 hp on the first and 78 on the second run, I can only come up with a 19% not 25%. I am also work off the largest spred of numbers. I talked with NX about these tests, they would not say much at this time. But the engine has made well over 100 pulls test there new intake. Couldn't the HP increase just be caused by the new spark plugs in the engine?
What are these plugs going to cost? How long will they last in a daily driven car? roughly 100miles per day. Why the hp loss when not on the nitrous?
One final note if you are not a dyno queen 15hp or 9hp mean nothing, I bet you could not even see it in the MPH on a 1/4mile track.
Just my thoughts.

383LQ4SS

iTrader: (33)

I see...definately get some tests with larger shots of nitrous. The difference should be more apparent then.

jimmyblue

iTrader: (11)

Umm... the little area about a spark plug electrode,
I would expect to decompose only the bit of nitrous
oxide that bothers to adsorb to its surface, out of
the whole cylinder volume. Look at the applied
surface area that the catalytic converter uses
to crack & combine the output gasses, vs the
area you can get on a spark plug electrode.
This all smells like a fuel line magnet to me.

VIl

To 383LQ4SS & Fast94bird:
Larger shots of nitrous, that`s what I`m speaking about, but I can`t force NX to tests the way I like. My own system has not been tested on an enough powerful car to provide more than 100 hp shot. It could be useful to stop talking about concrete numbers, but about percents, because all power addition about nitrous is a relative value. I bet nobody can use 250 shot system of nitrous for a 400 hp Camaro on a 130 hp VW... And so are my plugs: their power addition is approximately constant (1/4-1/3 of nitrous shot).
Also the NX guys could recieve even more from the plugs, by fixing the Air/Fuel ratio. If you take a look on the second graph on my site, you would surely see that the A/F ratio differs from the other ones and is equal to 13.4 (instead 12.7). By adding some more fuel they would get more from the plugs.

To Fast94bird:
No it couldn`t, because our plugs even showed a reduce of power without nitrous. This was caused by some deficiencies in technology, which was now fixed.

Now I take for the attachment of catalyzer 8$/plug. The delivery by UPS also costs near 100$/20 plugs (one way). The catalyzer is not affected in a daily driven engine, but with use of nitrous the plugs resource is about 2000 miles. Then, if they were not spoilt by high temperatures inside the combustion chamber, you should clean them from the coking and some other depositions in order to open the catalyzer to N2O+air+fuel mix.

Look 2 quotes up.

Well, 15 hp can`t be seen on a 1/4 mile, but what a 470 hp Camaro can show there? (not less than 13 sec) If only they would use, for example, a 250 shot, they would get around 60 hp increase with help of the plugs, that is more obvious result.

Let`s talk about percents, I`m sick of those concrete numbers, which do not express the main idea of the process.

VIl

To jimmyblue:
When the N2O starts cracking near the catalyst at ~200 C and the fuel starts burning, the flame front rapidly reaches temp of more than 600 C, so all other nitrous cracks too.
Also my patent application includes the placing of catalyst on any surface of combustion chamber. Of course, if you place the catalyst on the head surface or top of the piston, ..., the catalyst would work with better effect, but it`s many times easy to change a spark plug...
I have already told about it, look https://ls1tech.com/forums/showpost....8&postcount=19

FLYNLOW92rs

iTrader: (-1)

The are out on this one....

Prove it

It's a matter of chemistry, Nitrous is corrosive when decomposed in the presence of moisture...........Spin it anyway you want to sell your $100 spark plugs, but the facts are not on your side, just your word about your friends engine, to which there are no pictures......

VIl, so where can we access a database to look up that patent application and look at the details??

According to him nitrous isn't corrosive when decomposed in the presence of moisture...



So who's gonna be the first to spend the money and get this.....

VIl

To FLYNLOW92rs:
Prove that it is not so.

Make an experiment and show that nitrous is corrosive. It is not more than the oxigen of air at the same conditions. I will laugh for a long time when I will see the results (I know what are they going to be).

It seems you don`t know much about it.

I don`t know where you can find it. I have published my patent application #. Probably you have to ask a patent agent in your country about that.

koolrayz

iTrader: (26)

[QUOTE=VIl]

To koolrayz:

Please print your patent #'s so we can look them up.
QUOTE]
US patent # 6,575,436 B2 published on 6-10-2003 in my name.
Assigned to my corporation koolrayz Ind LLC
You have nothing to look at because an aplication is not published.


EDIT: Sorry, No flaming allowed....

VIl

Sorry, but what is that f@#king purpose of showing us that patent???

EDIT: Sorry no flaming for you too.

DERTY

Guys,

I think it's plain and simple that you all agree to disagree sometimes. Many of you will always wait until someone else proves it out for you. There certainly is nothing wrong with that. To that end a little net result testing is likely in order and as people try them out they will hopefully find some successes. With a 300 HP shot a 15% to 20% gain in power through efficiency is always welcome.

Unless you have anything significant to contribute I'd suggest we put this one to rest. I don't like the direction this is ultimately heading. So either put things on the straight and narrow or let it be.

Thanks!