Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

[clsage]

As I don't currently own The Ultimate Vehicle or the Vehicle

Sourcebook I'd appreciate any help/insights......

 

I'd like for one of the stock characters I'm building to have

access to a slightly modified motorcycle as her "megascale

movement device". Easy enough. But I'm not clear on the

most accepted method for building in a NOX injector system

into a vehicle. I'd wager that there is a description of a

basic NOX system somewhere in DC, DC:TAS, TUV or the HSVS

but, as mentioned above, I don't have access to those at

the moment so.....

 

My initial thought, since I want the gadget to have a slight level

of "unreliability/variance", is as follows:

 

AID, recoverable charges, IIF

 

Is there any better way to simulate this ? If the system is in

one of the published texts please point me to the appropriate

page(s)....Thanks.

 

-Carl-

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

As I don't currently own The Ultimate Vehicle or the Vehicle

Sourcebook I'd appreciate any help/insights......

 

I'd like for one of the stock characters I'm building to have

access to a slightly modified motorcycle as her "megascale

movement device". Easy enough. But I'm not clear on the

most accepted method for building in a NOX injector system

into a vehicle. I'd wager that there is a description of a

basic NOX system somewhere in DC, DC:TAS, TUV or the HSVS

but, as mentioned above, I don't have access to those at

the moment so.....

 

My initial thought, since I want the gadget to have a slight level

of "unreliability/variance", is as follows:

 

AID, recoverable charges, IIF

 

Is there any better way to simulate this ? If the system is in

one of the published texts please point me to the appropriate

page(s)....Thanks.

 

-Carl-

 

I haven't looked it up (I know it's in the TUV) but IIRC NOX was build as a Succor with a Fuel Charge.

[Robyn]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

My initial thought, since I want the gadget to have a slight level

of "unreliability/variance", is as follows:

 

AID, recoverable charges, IIF

 

Can't rely on it to consistently deliver an exact level of speed? If not for that I'd think Boostable charges.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

NOS (TUV p149) is built as a Non Combat Multiplier for Ground Movement

 

Turbo Charger (TUV p24) is built as a Succor: Ground Movement.

 

It does make the recommendation/alternative builds as simply Extra Inches of Ground Movement.

 

All built with Charges and Focus. Unreliability can be simulated with an Activation Roll if appropriate (possibly as a Partially Limited Power for Extra Ground Movement, you always get a little, sometimes you get a lot).

[clsage]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

NOS (TUV p149) is built as a Non Combat Multiplier for Ground Movement

 

Turbo Charger (TUV p24) is built as a Succor: Ground Movement.

 

It does make the recommendation/alternative builds as simply Extra Inches of Ground Movement.

 

All built with Charges and Focus. Unreliability can be simulated with an Activation Roll if appropriate (possibly as a Partially Limited Power for Extra Ground Movement, you always get a little, sometimes you get a lot).

 

Thanks all for the input...and ghost-angel, thanks for the page pointers...now

I just need to save some pennies and buy the "Vehicles bundle" from the

online store.

 

-Carl-

[Remjin]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

ummm... just as a reality note, Nitrous is used in very short terms. You use it for quarter-mile sprints and such, and even then, only for part of it unless you have multiple stages. The problem is nitrous volume and maintaining pressure... volume being the biggest concern. Large setups (300-500 Horsepower shots) are really only good for a few passes.

 

Long-haul power adders are turbochargers and superchargers. Turbos are spun with exhaust gasses, supercharges off the motor via drive pullies. For motorcycles only use turbos as far as I'm aware.

 

Thus, conceptually, if you just want a mega-scale sprint (short duration) Nitrous makes more sense... while long-hauling says turbos make more sense.

 

Also, some extremely scary bikes use both. Those two individuals I know of who had those modifications done rode their bikes once... and then shakily parked them in the garage, were thankful they survived, and never rode them again... though I believe one guy eventually took the nitrous off and rode it that way sometimes.

 

As another option, there is a bike that runs off of a turbine for a motor....but apparently it takes about 10 minutes to warm up but is superfast.

 

Sorry if I'm just hashing on what you already know... just wanted to throw it in there.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

As another option' date=' there is a bike that runs off of a turbine for a motor....but apparently it takes about 10 minutes to warm up but is superfast.[/quote']

 

The MK Y2K. It takes about 1 minute for the turbine to reach speed (54,000 RPMs) before you can drive it off. This is the model that Jay Leno owns for anyone that cares.

 

Linky

 

There are a pair of videos on that link of of one.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

Argh!

 

I've tried!

 

I've tried so very hard!

 

But we keep talking about bikes, and well.....

 

I won't offer any build advice, on the grounds I mentioned in another motorcyclish-thread: difficulty keeping "how it works" from "how it works in the game," but I can't help myself from giving a rough-over on 'how it works' and you perhaps can go from there on how you want to replicate that.

 

 

I'd like for one of the stock characters I'm building to have

access to a slightly modified motorcycle as her "megascale

movement device".

 

An excellent choice! "slightly modified motorcycles" are hands down the last word uber-nimble mega-scale movement devices.

 

But I'm not clear on the

most accepted method for building in a NOX injector system

into a vehicle.

 

NOS isn't the best way to go for extra speed. It is, however, nearly unbeatable for extra acceleration.

NOS is fed into the engine, preferably under pressure. It creates a mixutre far more volatile than gasoline and air, and you get a superior "boom" for your effort. The stronger boom produces greater torque, which is the essential portion of the acceleration equation.

 

The problem is extreme heat build-up. The mixture creates more heat than the engine can shed, which can lead to catastrophic failure in a very, very short time. Further, the increased 'boom' is actually destructive to the engine if run too long.

 

There's no real top-speed gain simply because to gain and hold top speed, you have to continue to run the mixture, which, as mentioned, will destroy the engine in a matter of minutes. A matter of seconds if you aren't accelerating: under acceleration, ignition timing is advanced, and the additional force _against_ the explosion actually helps to contain and harness the power. Without acceleration, the nitrous has nothing to do but melt holes in things.

 

 

Turbo and Super-charging:

 

Both turbos and super-charging are based on a similar principal:

and engine is, in essence, a gigantic air pump.

The more fuel mixture you get into it, the more effective it can be made. The downside is that you have to be able to get that air out, as well. Exhaust systems designed around performance turbos and super chargers are the reason that so many people think simply making an engine really loud will boost the power....

 

A turbo charger is a wonderful thing; it draws no power from the engine itself, as it is actually powered by the pressure of the exhaust. As the turbo engages, it crams more and more fuel mixture into the engine (making mileage lower and lower, but hey-- you're going faster, right?). Like with nitrous, increased fuel means a bigger explosion.

 

The difference here is that you are blowing up more gas and oxygen; the relative temperature of the explosion doesn't increase the way it does with nitrous. Thus, a turbo can be used pretty much all the time without too much fear melting your engine or snapping your crankshaft in half as with nitrous.

 

Turbo will add to top speed as well, as there are considerable increases in both torque and horsepower. The performance gains correlate directly to the amount of "boost" (the pressure under which the fuel air mix is forced into the engine) the charger produces.

 

Turbos are essentially "at idle" at cruising speeds and idle, meaning that fuel is economized, and the temperature penalty is minimized.

 

Yes, there _is_ some temp penalty, as forced air has increased friction, and it takes a good bit of cramming to get that power boost. The turbo itself gets extremely hot, as does the exchanger section of the exhaust. This is usually handled by cooling systems specifically for the charger, and additional cooling for the engine lubricant (charged engines are rough on crank bearings, and the increased rpm generates more heat in the bearings, etc).

 

The downside to the turbo is that it runs on exhaust pressure. Anyone who has driven a turbo is familiar with 'turbo lag;' that span of time between pressing the gas pedal and waiting for the engine rpm to pick up and that sudden kick in the seat when the rpm produces enough exhaust pressure to spin up the charger. This also makes it rather skittish in maneuvering, as letting off the gas will cut the charger out, then stomping on the fuel again will kick it back on straight away (think cornering or tight curves at high speed).

 

 

Superchargers offer far more power and consistency than turbos (roots type; radials are kind of a 'middle ground"), and a more steady boost, but they have several drawbacks all their own:

 

they are larger and heavier; they don't "idle off," so the fuel consumption continues at all rpm, and they make scads of heat, to the point where the charger needs additional cooling, usually tapped into the vehicle cooling system, which itself will usually require a good bit of upgrading.

 

They are also parasitic, meaning that they draw power from the engine simply to do their job. Thus, a portion of their power is used to keep themselves running. The end result is that it requires more boost (and heat build-up and long-term engine damage) to get similar power results to turbo. However, they aren't limited by exhaust pressure, and thus can be run to much higher boost, meaning much more power output.

 

The biggest drawback to a supercharger is that they are the death of the engine. Even that 3.8 that GM had on the market a few years back-- factory supercharger. Almost all of those things rattle and clack horribly now, most before hitting even 80,000 miles (about 1/4 the life cycle of an un charger 3.8).

 

Now,

 

as for top speed:

 

The biggest things you can do for top speed aren't really engine related:

 

Change the gearing, change the compression, change the timing, and change the exhaust. Exhaust tuning can radically alter acceleration and top speed, usually one at the expense of the other.

 

The engine modifications are primarily acceleration modifications; the engine doesn't really come into play at all for top speed until you reach a level of gearing that the factory engine has difficulty turning. At this point, additional power from the engine is a plus, since you can now turn more difficult gearing ratios.

 

Consider perhaps, for her 'rapid get away,' going with JATO or something similar.

 

Even the Y2K, a turbine-powered machine, is slower in acceleration than most production sportbikes until it nears 90-ish miles an hour.

 

 

Okay.

 

I'm done.

 

I'm sorry.

 

I just couldn't not say it any longer. :D

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

Oh-- almost forgot:

the most serious drawback of the turbo charger is its tendency to explode when driven incorrectly.....

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

The MK Y2K. It takes about 1 minute for the turbine to reach speed (54,000 RPMs) before you can drive it off. This is the model that Jay Leno owns for anyone that cares.

 

Linky

 

There are a pair of videos on that link of of one.

 

Arrrgh.. must spread it around blah blah blah

 

I'm inherently more or less opposed to ever owning a motorcycle, but there's the exception.

 

Day-um

[Remjin]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

Oh-- almost forgot:

the most serious drawback of the turbo charger is its tendency to explode when driven incorrectly.....

 

?!?!?!?!?! Never heard of this one...

[Remjin]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

Argh!

 

I've tried! I've tried so very hard! But we keep talking about bikes, and well.....

 

I won't offer any build advice, on the grounds I mentioned in another motorcyclish-thread: difficulty keeping "how it works" from "how it works in the game," but I can't help myself from giving a rough-over on 'how it works' and you perhaps can go from there on how you want to replicate that.

 

I hear ya, man, I'm a muscle car guy myself, but I kept it a bit simpler. =)

 

NOS isn't the best way to go for extra speed. It is, however, nearly unbeatable for extra acceleration.

NOS is fed into the engine, preferably under pressure. It creates a mixutre far more volatile than gasoline and air, and you get a superior "boom" for your effort. The stronger boom produces greater torque, which is the essential portion of the acceleration equation.

 

The problem is extreme heat build-up. The mixture creates more heat than the engine can shed, which can lead to catastrophic failure in a very, very short time. Further, the increased 'boom' is actually destructive to the engine if run too long.

 

There's no real top-speed gain simply because to gain and hold top speed, you have to continue to run the mixture, which, as mentioned, will destroy the engine in a matter of minutes. A matter of seconds if you aren't accelerating: under acceleration, ignition timing is advanced, and the additional force _against_ the explosion actually helps to contain and harness the power. Without acceleration, the nitrous has nothing to do but melt holes in things.

 

Hmmm... my understanding of nitrous is that its a way of ramming more oxygen into the cylinders. The oxygen portion is the important part, and its expansion causes cooling for denser charges as well. I do have to say all my experience and reading revolved around 8 cylinder motors, however, which are probably quite different in a lot of ways... they can maintain nitrous for quite some time, doing multiple stages, but usually that also means that there are much stronger parts in the motor as well as blow-out plates to minimize the damage nitrous can cause. =)

 

Turbo and Super-charging:

 

Both turbos and super-charging are based on a similar principal:

and engine is, in essence, a gigantic air pump.

The more fuel mixture you get into it, the more effective it can be made. The downside is that you have to be able to get that air out, as well. Exhaust systems designed around performance turbos and super chargers are the reason that so many people think simply making an engine really loud will boost the power....

Actually, any kind of boost is about forced induction of air. The injectors/carberator is what supplies the fuel, with increased boost requiring increased need for fuel.

A turbo charger is a wonderful thing; it draws no power from the engine itself, as it is actually powered by the pressure of the exhaust. As the turbo engages, it crams more and more fuel mixture into the engine (making mileage lower and lower, but hey-- you're going faster, right?). Like with nitrous, increased fuel means a bigger explosion.

 

The difference here is that you are blowing up more gas and oxygen; the relative temperature of the explosion doesn't increase the way it does with nitrous. Thus, a turbo can be used pretty much all the time without too much fear melting your engine or snapping your crankshaft in half as with nitrous.

Already talked about the fuel thing. Turbos do actually impact engine power but kind of as a secondary because of the increased back-pressure it causes. This is, of course, controlled, and its still more efficient than a supercharger. Crankshaft failure with either is about a weak part. Depending on how you have your nitrous set up, it shouldn't hit much harder than a turbo unless you're dumping in LARGE (250+ hp) shots of it. Its all relative... compare that to a 30-40 psi turbo booster running on a 4 or 6 cylinder engine...

The downside to the turbo is that it runs on exhaust pressure. Anyone who has driven a turbo is familiar with 'turbo lag;' that span of time between pressing the gas pedal and waiting for the engine rpm to pick up and that sudden kick in the seat when the rpm produces enough exhaust pressure to spin up the charger. This also makes it rather skittish in maneuvering, as letting off the gas will cut the charger out, then stomping on the fuel again will kick it back on straight away (think cornering or tight curves at high speed).

This is more so with smaller displacement motors, but boost pressure always correlates to how hard you're running the engine. The more rpm's, the more boost, but its a bit more controlled with larger displacement engines. Basically, there is virtually no lag in 8 cylinder motors, I imagine the lag is quite pronounced in a motorcycle.

Superchargers offer far more power and consistency than turbos (roots type; radials are kind of a 'middle ground"), and a more steady boost, but they have several drawbacks all their own:

 

they are larger and heavier; they don't "idle off," so the fuel consumption continues at all rpm, and they make scads of heat, to the point where the charger needs additional cooling, usually tapped into the vehicle cooling system, which itself will usually require a good bit of upgrading.

How do they offer far more power? Turbos are considered an "unfair" advantage in many drag racing circles because of their higher efficiencies. When it comes down to it, PSI of boost determines the power gains, not what's spinning to make it. You don't get more power from the same boost just because its a supercharger.

They are also parasitic, meaning that they draw power from the engine simply to do their job. Thus, a portion of their power is used to keep themselves running. The end result is that it requires more boost (and heat build-up and long-term engine damage) to get similar power results to turbo. However, they aren't limited by exhaust pressure, and thus can be run to much higher boost, meaning much more power output.

Now if this is your reasoning for the above, I get it a bit more. =) I wouldn't say damage as much as increased wear, though. Then again, in the power levels you're talking about here, they tear down the engine after a run or two anyway. =)

The biggest drawback to a supercharger is that they are the death of the engine. Even that 3.8 that GM had on the market a few years back-- factory supercharger. Almost all of those things rattle and clack horribly now, most before hitting even 80,000 miles (about 1/4 the life cycle of an un charger 3.8).

Most of the older cars I deal with don't usually have problems. Modern GM parts don't have the quality the old blocks did, and if its clacking and rattling it sounds like failure to maintain the cylinder heads which do need to have their lash set, even with modern hydraulic valvetrains. And heck, most american cars are almost crapped out by 80,000 miles nowadays...

Okay. I'm done. I'm sorry. I just couldn't not say it any longer. :D

 

I don't think its a problem. I like discussing these things. I just wanted to join in a bit. If I didn't comment on it, its cuz I already did in another part or I just agreed with you. Of course, if you're coming from the motorcycle world, we're going to be on different pages in several ways since I'm coming from the whole muscle/classic car scene.

 

And hey, good to see another gearhead on here...

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

?!?!?!?!?! Never heard of this one...

 

More common on motorcycles, owing to the insane redlines.

 

Essentially, it's common amongst loud-pipe clutch monkeys:

 

Guys who figure if they can pony up the cash to have someone else install it for them, then they run out and buy the 'cool pipes du jour' as opposed to actually tuning their exhaust.

 

They sit at the red light, rapping their engine up and down just to hear the turbo kick in and the see the pipes go all cherry.....

 

Suddenly they're cherry-hot pipes are all filled with a few pounds of unburned, pressurized fuel mix (remember, they didn't _tune_ the exhaust; they just went with the cool one! ).

 

One very loud "boom", one or more shattered head pipes, maybe a shattered leg, and usually lots of burns as invariably the oil return line gets busted.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

Sorry--

 

You had raised a couple of things, and I meant to answer you. Bit woozy from chemical overdose earlier....

 

To go on:

 

I hear ya' date=' man, I'm a muscle car guy myself, but I kept it a bit simpler. =)[/quote']

 

Love to look at them; love to see them at drag night; and I wish that someone would have the courage to bring style back to cars. But beyond boring, balancing, and blue-printing, I've not done any serious modifications to any. Oh, and the all-important 'shoehorn the 454 into a Vega;' and find a nice car and bolt a charger on it, but I think everybody that was into hotrods did that at one point or another... [smiley removed by order of the software]

 

 

Hmmm... my understanding of nitrous is that its a way of ramming more oxygen into the cylinders. The oxygen portion is the important part, and its expansion causes cooling for denser charges as well.

 

I've heard that before myself, and not being a chemist, I can't say that it doesn't happen, but I can't feature how the oxy in the NOS would be freed up in the process. Generally, I hear it as part of a "does to/ does not" debate between groups of guys in the pits, none of are chemists, either Sorry-- things like that amuse me [smiley removed by order of the software]

 

As for the denser charge thing: I can't speak to that much, either. That is to say, yes, you get a denser charge, but I don't know if it's because the NOS cools, or if serves as a catalyst of some sort. I do know that if it is cooling the charge, it's not doing it enough to cool the engine. Shooting nitro on a bike causes an almost immediate spike in temperature, and climbs steadily until either engine failure or the NOS is taken out of the system.

 

oops; forgot my qualifier: this is motorcycle-specific:

 

As I admit, I don't do much wth cars. Given the sheer capacities of the cooling system, etc, I've little doubt that they will be able to tolerate _much_ more heat build-up from any source, if only because they can dissipate it faster.

 

I do have to say all my experience and reading revolved around 8 cylinder motors' date=' however, which are probably quite different in a lot of ways...[/quote']

 

Indeed! One serious advantage is that each revolution is divided across eight cylinders; compared to a 2-cylinder motorcycle engine, each cylinder of a V-8 has roughly 4 times the amount of time for the cooling system to do its job before it gets hit again. Factor in redlines that can break 12000 rpm, and you can easily have one cylinder in a motorcycle engine firing 16 times more per minute than that of a V-8. Anything that increases heat is bad, bad, bad in a big fluffy kind of way, especially in light of the very tiny cooling systems water-cooled bike engines have, and, with your background, you can easily see the issues. And an air-cooled bike? Ugh.

 

they can maintain nitrous for quite some time' date=' doing multiple stages, but usually that also means that there are much stronger parts in the motor as well as blow-out plates to minimize the damage nitrous can cause. =)[/quote']

 

Precisely: increased cooling; less focus on any cylinder, and thicker, heavier, stronger parts-- steel and cast iron are in much more abundance on an automotive engine-- allows for much more tolerance.

 

 

Actually' date=' any kind of boost is about forced induction of air. The injectors/carberator is what supplies the fuel, with increased boost requiring increased need for fuel.[/quote']

 

Right you are. In my effort to keep it simple and sort of short, I over-simplified a bit. Same with turbo v Super: a bit too much over-simplifying. Case in point:

 

Turbos do actually impact engine power but kind of as a secondary because of the increased back-pressure it causes.

 

Right, but on a motorcycle, which lacks any real collector beyond that needed to add a turbo, it's more or less a non-issue. Rarely are there more than two cylinders fed into any pipe, and even then, the goal is just a hint of scavenging. For most drag applications (and, given the goal of the OP for the topic, that's the direction I went), a non-turbo engine will have one pipe per cylinder, whereas only the biggest of guns do this on automotive set-ups (to the best of my knowledge). Turbo-tuned exhaust, at least as far as bikes go, don't add as much back pressure as their automotive counterparts may. Again, not that familiar with cars.

 

In fact, this is actually part of the danger with running turbo on a bike: if the exhaust isn't precisely tuned, the loss of scavenging presented by the addition of a turbo collector can cause unburned fuel to accumulate in the collector-- sort of an "eddy." In an actual race, this is no big deal, for as the exhaust pressure increases, the fuel will be forced through the exhaust.

 

But then there's the repeated revving thing I mentioned in the the previos post.

 

This is' date=' of course, controlled, and its still more efficient than a supercharger.[/quote']

 

Agreed on all counts; it's the same on a bike: turbo is essentially "free" power, with a small sacrifice to exhaust performance, while a Super takes a chunk of what it gives you.

 

Crankshaft failure with either is about a weak part. Depending on how you have your nitrous set up' date=' it shouldn't hit much harder than a turbo unless you're dumping in LARGE (250+ hp) shots of it.[/quote']

 

That's probably the case with a car crankshaft. With a motorcycle, it's more about tidal pull. NOS will let high reving engine run super-high revs effortlessly. Without a rev-limiter of some sort, the crank, much smaller and lighter to begin with, will essentially rip itself to pieces by over-spinning its balance or exceeding its ability to lube the rod journals. Either way, bad bad bad [simley removed by order of the software] And again, my only NOS experience has been with bikes. Considering all the other mechanical differences, I'm not at all surprised to find out that it's different with car engines. Do car engines get the same RPM boost as bikes, or just explosion boost?

 

This is more so with smaller displacement motors' date=' but boost pressure always correlates to how hard you're running the engine. The more rpm's, the more boost, but its a bit more controlled with larger displacement engines. Basically, there is virtually no lag in 8 cylinder motors, I imagine the lag is quite pronounced in a motorcycle.[/quote']

 

With an RPM range of say 1 to 14000, yes. There is a noticeable lag. There are two options: the first is to tune the exhaust so as to provide boost immediately, as soon as you crack your wrist. The problem there is that you do create an enormous, engine-clogging back pressure once the raps get up. The other option is to try to dial the boost into the power band, where it does the most good in terms of acceleration. And the problem there is that until you get into that range, you lack sufficient back pressure to gain significant boost.

 

That lag, and the on-off-on-off-on characteristics that result from it, are the reasons you don't see a lot of turbo on track bikes or street racers. There are a lot of them on the drag strip, however, as you don't expect to have to back off the wick for a curve.

 

How do they offer far more power?

 

My bad; a reference error:

They offer far more _performance gain throughout the engine's RPM range_. Sorry; I got wound up, and didn't qualify that for those folks who don't hot rod bikes [face of shame removed by order of the software]

 

As noted above, the wide range of the RPM means that there's going to be a point where the turbo either offers nothing or detracts from performance. Not so much with a Super; if they're running, they're making boost.

 

Turbos are considered an "unfair" advantage in many drag racing circles because of their higher efficiencies.

 

Same thing on bike tracks, but I think most folks who say that simply find that "kick in" and resulting additional gees to be 'insult to injury.' [smiley removed by order of the software] I've never seen a guy with a turbo who thought it was unfair [wink removed by order of the software]

 

You don't get more power from the same boost just because its a supercharger.

 

I hope the above clarification explains that.[face of shame removed by order of the software]

 

I wouldn't say damage as much as increased wear' date=' though. [/quote']

 

On the average "performance" motorcycle engine, it really is outright damage, turbo, super, or otherwise. As noted, a bike can gain more _useable, continuous_ power from a supercharger. But the resulting increase in _continuous_ boost pretty much "busts 'em up" in short order: again, the increased fires per cylinder per minute, combined with the aluminum 'almost everything' and the thinner, lighter components---

Serious power-oriented boost levels (not just 'street rod,' but the "x4 NCM" levels) will wreck the engine in short order. Or, as you phrased it:

 

Then again' date=' in the power levels you're talking about here, they tear down the engine after a run or two anyway. =)[/quote']

 

Yep [smiley removed by order of the software] That's the ticket! [ditto]

 

And heck' date=' most american cars are almost crapped out by 80,000 miles nowadays... [/quote']

 

That's what really bugged me about the Super-charged 3800: the unmodded 3800 is the most durable engine GM has created in the past 20 years! Sadly, they put them in the worst-designed bodies in the history of the company.... The salvage yards are filling up with completely worn out cars with engines that are good for another 200k.....

 

 

tragedy. But I digress! Sorry. [face of shame removed by order of the software]

 

 

I don't think its a problem. I like discussing these things.

 

And as a motorhead myself, I nearly live for it. Not as much as riding, but very close! [smiley removed, yadda yadda...]

 

Like you, I love discussing this.

 

But I feel bad enough for having dumped all that in here, and then this again.

 

If you'd care to go over it more, let's go to PM, so as not to further muddy up this um... er....

 

aspect of the HERO system we're discussing :D :D :D [with luck, I can edit this enough to keep these smileys!]

 

Thanks!

 

Great! As soon as I sober up, I'm going for a ride!

 

 

And hey' date=' good to see another gearhead on here...[/quote']

 

Back atcha, Hoss!

[Remjin]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

More common on motorcycles, owing to the insane redlines.

 

Essentially, it's common amongst loud-pipe clutch monkeys:

 

Guys who figure if they can pony up the cash to have someone else install it for them, then they run out and buy the 'cool pipes du jour' as opposed to actually tuning their exhaust.

 

They sit at the red light, rapping their engine up and down just to hear the turbo kick in and the see the pipes go all cherry.....

 

Suddenly they're cherry-hot pipes are all filled with a few pounds of unburned, pressurized fuel mix (remember, they didn't _tune_ the exhaust; they just went with the cool one! ).

 

One very loud "boom", one or more shattered head pipes, maybe a shattered leg, and usually lots of burns as invariably the oil return line gets busted.

 

 

 

OOOOOOW!!!!!

[Remjin]

Re: Nitro Injection System For Motorcycles

 

Apologies to those that did not want to read about all that. =) I have moved it to PM. =)