I am considering going the dry 100 - 125 shot route. The only way I can think of doing it without moving the MAF (remember I am in a truck) is to add the nozzle at the end of the K&N cone style filter.

This leaves me either using a jet nozzle or no nozzle at all since most nozzles are 90 degree dispursion. The overall length of the cone filter is 7.5". The total distance to the MAF sensors is about 8.5". Is this far enough away to avoid freezing the MAF? Would the stream be to disrupted when using no nozzle?

If a jet spray nozzle stream is to concentrated for a 125 shot, could two nozzles be used, say one 50 and the other 50/75 to help enlarge the stream area?

Or am I over thinking this?

 

Just clip the end off of a fan-jet nozzle if you want to mount in the end of the filter.
Freezing the MAF isn't really an issue. Freezing the screen is the problem, so you need to remove the screen to run the dry shot.
The closer you spray to the MAF, the more extra fuel you get.
If you end up running a little lean with your 100 shot, then just either move the nozzle closer to the MAF wires.

Yeah you were overthinking. Dry is incredibly simple.

 

Yep, I agree with White2001, just cut the 90* tip off and it'll be a straight shooter, no problem, been there, done that.
Robert

 

as unsafe as i feel dry kits are, cutting the tip off the nozzle sounds not too smart. they are specifically designed to fan out the spray pattern for proper distribution. Check the top of the page and see the Zex filter w/ built in sprayer.

 

Planned on removing the screen. The Zex filter seemed a little small and placed the nozzle to close to MAF or at least I thought. I would probably just buy a jet spray nozzle instead of cutting - they are pretty cheap.

So, the closer the nozzle is to the wires of the MAF, more fuel is injected by the computer. Is there has to be a minimum distance from the MAF to the nozzle?

 

NX now has a nice straight fan spray nozzle out. I plan to use one with my cone style filter on my Silverado.

 

I saw the NOS one. But it did not say anything about spray pattern. I'll look at the NX one.
Thanks all who replied. I'll probably be back.

 

I believe that the straight NOS is a jet pattern, not a nice fan spray. Being so close to the MAF, a jet spray probrably wouldn't work well at all and alot of nitrous wouldn't be registered. If you wanted to spend some money you could switch to an aftermarket box style intake and fog the box. Or go back to the stock box with a good filter.

 

Here's some pics of the NX nozzle. It should work perfect. https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...ght=dry+nozzle .

 

That was a pretty recent thread. Thanks for the link. BTW, what year is your Silverado?

 

With only 18 posts, I would be careful on proposing that you have specific nitrous knowledge. First, dry is safer than wet by design, you need to do some research. Second, your proposal that a 90* dry nozzle are made that way to fan out the spray pattern for proper distribution, is not correct. The reason there is 90* dry nozzles is to turn the spray 90*. Do a search for a clear lid spray of dual straight nozzles, nice pattern. Crack your bottle open sometime and check the pattern.
First pic is a straight nozzle, and second is a 90* nozzle. Both the same truck, and in fact, he was able to get a better reading using the straight nozzle.


Robert

 

I actually had post with the owner of that truck. As you can see, he has a custom intake that he made himself. I already dropped the cash on the K&N sometime ago and figured adding the straight nozzle at the end for a nitrous setup would be my best bet.

BTW, do most kits come with bulkhead fitting? Are nozzle thread sizes standard?

 

I have a '00 RCSB. As you can imagine, I'm not impressed with the 4.8.

If your buying a dry kit, a bulkhead fitting should come with the kit. Many dry nozzles are 1/16" npt but some are larger.

 

WOW---I forgot on that in internet land, the # of posts you have is what gives you actual,real world experience.I have gone through 100s of bottles, each time learning something i didnt know before.(And alot of things I never wanted to know!)but back on topic, I cant agree that these dry kits that fog the MAF are safer than a properly engineered wet kit.What do your A/Frs look like on the spray??

 

Mine start's at 11.8 goes to 11.5 at torque peak then taper back to about 11.8 at max rpm. There are many tuning tricks for dry hits, because you lack this knowledge you want to jump on the uninformed bandwagon and try to imply wet is safer?
Here's what a properly engineered wet kit, that was professionly installed with all the safety stuff, can do. Try to find one that this happened to on a dry hit. As a matter of fact, you'ed be hard pressed to find someone who hurt their motor at all running a dry hit.
Wet intake explosion
Robert

 

Robert,

I watched the video and almost cried. Did I read his car was covered under insurance? You may have scared a few away from nitrous. Not me!

 

Yea, the guy told ins he was racing? wish I had an ins co like that. I hpe I didn't scare anyone away. I am trying to dispell this idea some have that wet hits are safer than dry, where this comes from, I don't know? This is not the only forum with this thinking, and a couple that don't think this way.
Robert

 

dang Robert! keep an open mind too though. I have learned alot from your web site thanks for that Rob! I would really like to call you and pay you for helping me be faster. You are right, I have no idea what ive got myself into. can i ask for a truce and ask for your help? larry k

 

I think I have an open mind. It wasn't personal against anyone. It was more of the bad rap that dry gets for some reason, and just setting the record straight. I my self will be going to a 3rd stage wet, but that doesn't change the facts. You as well as anyone can have any help/knowledge I can offer. Sorry to anyone that thought I was a little harsh.
Robert

 

hey robert you have email at the nitrous site
//cool thanks rob, do you have yahoo or aim?