It's held together with 3 allen head bolts. After you cut away the unneeded part of the stock housing you bolt the new half onto it. It is a very nice and clean fit.

 

Ok to each his own but lets gets just a few things straight. The comment about a "fuel jacuzzi in your plenum. I would never run a wet system on an LS1 and especially not spraying fuel there." That your right but you must not understand how well these cars work with nitrous. Wet has been proven time and time and time again.
"A simple nozzle and a single solenoid can do the job twice as good in dry configuration."
There is no way a dry kit can make the torque a wet kit can. And your statement sound like if a wet can make 100 then your dry on the same jet can make 200.
I also wouldn't run a MAF either, but that's another story. Thing looks to be only slightly more restrictive than the usual MAF gear."
You really need some glasses on this one, the body is larger no restriction of any kind.
Let's see:
overpirced check You do not know even what the price is, UNCHECK
restrictive check NON restrictive, UNCHECK
can't hide it check Never wanted to hide, so daaa.
fuel jacuzzi check only is your nitrous is not turned on.
backfire in intake pending" DAA welcome to nitrous 101 backfire pending is like say you are going to die one day, or if you hit yourself with a hammer its going to hurt. All nitrous system have the chance of backfiring, especially if you do not take the safety tips that are giving.

Now I under that you might be looking for something cheep, used, and dirty so you can hide it that cool no problem. I did not build this to please everyone in the world just the customers that wanted and asked for it...
Thanks to everyone that has email me I should be posting up somepicture of this on a c5 Vette in the next few days.
Ricky

 

Here's an explanation on puddling by NXRicky.
Puddel-ing myth or fact.

What is puddle-ing?
Can it cause a backfire in my intake?
Why is this term used so often?

pud·dle P Pronunciation Key (p d l)
1.
a.A small pool of water, especially rainwater.
b.A small pool of a liquid.

Puddleing is a term used to described fuel collecting in an intake on the walls or in the floor of an intake.
Puddle-ing cannot make a car back fire. The fuel will not self ignite in this arena. And fuel cannot puddle in an intake.
The term is over used to describe a backfire. People will say “It is always the nitrous’ fault” when there is backfire while using nitrous. “It puddle” This thought process is simply because it is so violent when it does happen.
I have read the posts over the last few years about fuel collecting in an intake. OK
And the lean backfires. Ok

Question is “what lit the fuel in the runner”. What cause the flame to come into the intake side of things and light the fuel nitrous mixture in an intake? I believe it has to do the velocity. Airflow coming into cylinder must be decreased some how for the flame to be allowed into the intake track. This is why all nitrous companies tell you not to spray an engine below 3000 RPM’s. The nitrous injecting into your engine has a higher velocity then the actual engine cfm flow at that rpm. Air stalls or slows down just enough for the flame in the combustion chamber to come back up into your intake port and then you have a backfire. .
Also you will only be able to put X amount of nitrous and fuel into and engine. Being that it is an air pump the pump can only move so many cfm’s and a nitrous system can not pressurize the intake track. (non-boosted applications)

Damp areas are not going to light themselves; if there were any damp areas in an intake. Areas that are wet after an intake has been ran on car are from vapors that are hanging around once the car is turned off.

Air hushing into a cylinder helps push the unburned and burning media into the exhaust. If you ever started a car without a header or exhaust manifolds on; you have seen the flames. So as long as velocity is kept up no problems, this is a per cylinder way of looking at it.
Air travels though a 347cubic inch engine at __156__ mph at 6500 RPM with a 75mm throttle body. Now lets say from the backside of your throttle body to the exhaust port is 3 ft. It only takes air .0131 of a second to go from the throttle body to the exhaust port. So in no way can the fuel puddle in an intake. There is not enough time.

Note that these calculations make some assumptions like non-turbo, and airflow is equal to displacement, etc.

 

I can barely control myself.
Robert

 

that looks extremely nice id definitly buy one

 

True never said you didnt but you do if you want to use a dry system and run MAFless unless there is something new I havent heard of yet.

 

My reply,

I have only to reference Homeslice (tm) https://ls1tech.com/forums/nitrous-oxide/349348-will-100-dry-shot-max-out-stock-injectors-98-z28.html

Single nozzle and single solenoid adding another 200hp to a stock C5...and a tad bit of torque. It's an automatic car with 3.15 gears and went from low 13's @106 to 11.0 @127 I'd have to say the torque was there. I never said anything about a jet, just that you can make more power with way less money... whatever it's going to cost.

Wet systems create conditions for the big explosive backfire... dry does not.

Your kit is probably no more restrictive than a stock MAF, but the aren't we assuming that placing something in the air path creates no restriction? The amount of restriction will depend entirely on the engine combination it is to go on. This is really not why I don't like the kit though, just an observation.

Delivering fuel further away from the intake valve has been proven to cause wall-wetting, puddling, and loss of performance many years ago with carburetors. Moving the delivery way out in front of the TB just seems like a bad plan from the start. Wet flowing in a manifold designed only for dry flow also seems to be a bad plan from the start.

It's too bad a nitrous company can't afford to admit to a bad plan instead of pointing to operator error causing every failure. Yes people make errors but that's like selling someone a boat with a hole in it and blaming the captian for leaving it in the water too long.

A busted intake is likely to mean more people buying upgrade intakes. Are you sure makers of wet kits aren't getting kickbacks from the makers of intakes?

How does anyone even argue the wet kit explosions anymore? How many busted intakes, hoods blown off, and car fires will it take?
You think backfires are inevitable?

My first car was a chevy vega. It had a bad fuel leak that dripped right on top of a huge exhaust leak (section of flange missing) where the pipe bolted to the manifold. It seems like a car fire waiting to happen, but even after a year of driving like this the fire never happened. That doesn't make it a good plan does it?

I'm sure your safety tips don't include requirements like "do not run a long duration camshaft with significant overlap" or "only run unbreakable valvesprings while using out wet kit".

Don't get me wrong though. I don't care how many wet kits get sold, or how many explosive backfires people have. I just don't care to run one myself when it is easier and cheaper to do it another way that also works better. That is still my opinion and there is still a good list of reasons why it works better. I do know that wet systems also work and I've used some myself in the past. If I were given one, I'd sell it though.

 

Yeah, you would just use edit or another tuner, or even a simple CTS tricker for enrichment. CTS tricker can be done for about $15 on the cheap side.
You'd be surprised what you can do without spending a fortune for somebody's kit.

 

"Delivering fuel further away from the intake valve has been proven to cause wall-wetting, puddling, and loss of performance many years ago with carburetors. Moving the delivery way out in front of the TB just seems like a bad plan from the start. Wet flowing in a manifold designed only for dry flow also seems to be a bad plan from the start. "
This statement is off base and yet some what correct. Let me fix your statement.
It should have read like this.
"Delivering fuel further away from the intake valve has been proven to cause wall-wetting, puddling, and loss of performance many years ago when dealing with a Carburetor that is why companies went to fuel injection system, also the electronic became cheaper. Moving the delivery way out in front of the TB just seems like a bad plan from the start When dealing with Caruretor injection. Wet flowing in a manifold with a properly set up wet kit is just fine and make plenty of power and is the best all around way of getting the most out of your nitrous syste."
Hope this helps, since you are bases your explaination of why to use a dry kit on one persons statements..
O yea I forgot I am not getting a kick back from an intake company that is just funny.
Interesting.
Ricky

 

looks very nice. I like it a lot, now I just need my vette to put it on

 

I was joking about the kickback thing.

IMO a carburetor does a better job of metering fuel in an emulsion, as compared to the "atomization" of a wet nitrous system.

Wet systems obviously feed all of the cylinders through a dry-flow intake, but there are distribution problems with the fuel, and the case of fuel dropping out on to the intake floor.
Distribution problems are masked by running the system on the rich side which ultimately costs some power, increases the puddling, and increases the likelyhood of a backfire.

Yes the wetting problems were discovered years ago, but they still happen today with wet-flow systems.

 

Still a nice piece, and is on my list of possible nitrous routes to take.

I've made up my mind it's going on my car, just a matter of how it's getting there.

 

If you really wanted to go with this system for it's clean look and super easy installation, all you'd have to do is buy one of the 85mm LS6 one-piece MAF sensors that are on the market. SLP, Granatelli, PACE, and a few others all offer these with the necessary conversion harness for under $200.

I'm actually considering doing this myself either now or later as an upgrade to the current MAF system.

 

I'm sure that there will be one out that won't require anything other then the parts from NX soon enough, so there won't be a need for any other MAF. I'm still looking into a couple other options right now, once those have been explored entirely, then I'll make the decision.

 

Yes, you're right. Now that I think about it, all they'd have to do is mount a set of those solenoids on the back of one of their existing MAF ends from their current MAF system and we'd be in business!

NXRICKY: What about it, Ricky? Could you fellas whip up some rear MAF ends from the existing kits with those solenoids mounted on them for our multi-piece MAF sensors? Maybe also provide them as upgrades to those with the existing setup? They'd sell like hotcakes!

 

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, you COULD just go on EBay Motors, search for one, find it for $42, order it, then go to Casper's electronics and order their wiring harness that integrates the 3 wire MAF cable with the IAT, and be done with it for ~$90.



Can you show a pic of where you would cut the MAF? I think I know where it would be after looking at it, but I just wanted to see it

 

$90 does sound better than ~$180.

 

JL ws-6 and XTrooper- I took a look at the 3 piece MAF housing this morning and just by looking at at I don't think there is enough material to have the solenoids mounted the same as the new 1 piece housing. We would probably need to have the machinist make them with added materil on each side for mounting the solenoids.

Bug the hell out of Ricky until he tells the machinist to make it happen

 

Would be nice if it could happen.... and be an easy swap, like putting MAF ends on a factory MAF. That would be the ticket right there.

needed tools for kit install: allen key for MAF dissassembly, drill for switches, drill for bottle brackets, 2 wrenches for bottle bracket installation, screwdriver to remove interior parts to run wires.

Total time : 1 to 2 hours.

A 5 year old that can put together a model could install it... that alone should bea big enough sellign point to make it happen!

Rickey, get on it man!

 

I agree!

RICKY! Make it so!