|
wimjack |
|
||
|
Hey Guys
I was thinking about buying a Nitro kit for my xb coupe.However I am running straight gas with an imco 425 mixer.Does any one know if you can run nitrous oxide with lpg,Has any one tried it ,If so how is it set up? |
||
Top | |
MRE-50L |
|
|||
|
you cant do it
As from what i have been told , ive been out of that line of work way too long to remeber
_________________ Chance Favors The Prepared Mind ! |
|||
Top | |
EBXR8380 |
|
|||
|
LPG has a problem of backfireing and so does N20.So a shot of N20 would not be a good idea..Imo...
Would possibly run heaps lean also...
_________________ As in ZOOM 126 edition |
|||
Top | |
Macca |
|
|||
|
Can be done, has been done, not as simple as setting up a wet fuel system.
Email RobMadden@ozrace.com http://www.ozrace.com/ Which is OzNos or formally known as Madden Nitrous.
_________________ 93 Ford Maverick LWB automatic petrol guzzler (gets stuck where Deli doesn't, big pumpkins ) |
|||
Top | |
Macca |
|
|||
|
If you do a search on the web you might find something, problem with searching Nitrous Oxide is to many d***head who think they know what they are doing, write articles using Nitrous Oxide name for NOx, NOx is Nitrogen Oxide (one of the smog pollutions to put it simple). Both are pollutants but are totally different except for the fact they contain Nitrogen and Oxygen.
Quote: E.P.A. Says Catalytic Converter Is
Growing Cause of Global Warming By Matthew L. Wald Copyright 1998 The New York Times May 29, 1998 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WASHINGTON -- The catalytic converter, an invention that has sharply reduced smog from cars, has now become a significant and growing cause of global warming, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Hailed as a miracle by Detroit automakers even today, catalytic converters have been reducing smog for 20 years. The converters break down compounds of nitrogen and oxygen from car exhaust that can combine with hydrocarbons, also from cars, and be cooked by sunlight into smog. But researchers have suspected for years that the converters sometimes rearrange the nitrogen-oxygen compounds to form nitrous oxide, known as laughing gas. And nitrous oxide is a potent greenhouse gas, more than 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide, the most common of the gases, that is warming the atmosphere, according to experts. This spring, the EPA published a study estimating that nitrous oxide now comprises about 7.2 percent of the gases that cause global warming. Cars and trucks, most fitted with catalytic converters, produce nearly half of that nitrous oxide, the study said. (Other sources of nitrous oxide include everything from nitrogen-based fertiliser to manure from farm animals.) The EPA study also showed that nitrous oxide is one of a few gases for which emissions are increasing rapidly. Collectively known as greenhouse gases, they trap heat in the earth's atmosphere. The increase in nitrous oxide, the study notes, stems from the growth in the number of miles travelled by cars that have catalytic converters. And the problem has worsened as improvements in catalytic converters, changes that have eliminated more of the nitrogen-oxygen compounds that cause smog, have conversely produced more nitrous oxide. Wylie J. Barbour, an EPA official who worked on the recently published inventory, said that the problem created by the converter is classic. "You've got people trying to solve one problem, and as is not uncommon, they've created another." Nitrous oxide, or N²O, is not regulated because the Clean Air Act was written in 1970 to control smog, not global warming. And no regulations exist to control gases that are believed to cause global warming. The United States and the other industrialised nations agreed in Kyoto, Japan, last December to lower emissions of greenhouse gases to 5 percent below 1990 levels, over the next 10 to 15 years, but the agreement has not been approved by the Senate, and no implementing rules have been written. "This hadn't really been on people's radar screen until climate change started becoming an issue," said one EPA official involved in reducing pollution from cars, who asked not to be identified by name. The EPA has not proposed a solution at this point, and is seeking public comment on its study. Auto industry experts say they could solve the problem by tinkering with the catalytic converter, but some environmentalists suggest that the growing production of nitrous oxide is yet another reason to move away from gasoline-powered cars. The EPA's study estimated that nitrous oxide may represent about one-sixth of the global warming effect that results from gasoline use. "It's like, clean is not green," said Sheila Lynch, executive director of the Northeast Alternative Vehicle Coalition, a public-private partnership that encourages non-traditional power sources. Another expert, Christopher S. Weaver, an engineering consultant who wrote a study on the subject for the environmental agency, said, "We haven't cared enough to establish standards." Precisely how much nitrous oxide the converters produce remains an issue. A report used by the EPA in preparing its greenhouse gas study, calculated that a car with a fuel economy of about 19 miles a gallon would produce .27 grams of nitrous oxide per mile. That represents an amount that is about one-third the limit of emissions for nitrogen oxide, the chemicals causing smog. Steven H. Cadle, a research scientist at General Motors, said, "it's a huge number." In contrast, an older car without a catalytic converter produces much larger amounts of nitrogen oxides, but only about a tenth as much nitrous oxide, the greenhouse gas. The EPA calculated that production of nitrous oxide from vehicles rose by nearly 50 percent between 1990 and 1996 as older cars without converters have neared extinction. Using a standard unit of measure for global warming gases, millions of metric tons of carbon equivalent, nitrous oxide emissions rose to 54.7 million tons from 36.7 million during those years, the study said. The contradictory impact of the converter has not been lost on environmental officials or industry experts, who continue to debate not only the extent of the growing problem as well as how to reduce the emissions in future years. Ned Sullivan, the head of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, said the converter problem requires a "comprehensive" response. "This specific issue fits into a broader context that our regulatory system has tended to deal with pollutants on an individual, rather than a comprehensive, basis," he said. He and others favour moving away from today's typical car design, a big gasoline engine driving the wheels, to electric cars. Maine would like electric cars. Another solution is hybrid cars, which use small, efficient engines running on gasoline to help turn the wheels and to charge batteries for electric motors that also run the wheels. Those have much higher fuel economy, and thus lower greenhouse gas emissions. Car industry experts, however, favour less drastic changes. They propose cutting nitrous oxide production by adjusting catalytic converters in future models. They suspect that the gas is produced when the converter is warming up, and believe the converters could be redesigned to reach optimum temperature faster. That would also help them destroy other pollutants better. Weaver said that measurements on more kinds of cars and light trucks would be needed to be certain about the size of the problem. But Weaver said, "It is quite clear that you produce nitrous oxide in a catalyst, in some circumstances." At the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental group, an expert on transportation pollution, Roland Hwang, said, "We can't be pushing forward trying to reduce smog while making the global warming problem worse; we can't have programs that undercut each other." He said this was evidence that the transportation system would have to use something besides gasoline. Cadle, of General Motors would not go that far. But, he said, "You have to be holistic and try and look at everything, which is obviously difficult." And we are still brain washed into thinking catalytic converters are the be all and end all to pollution.
_________________ 93 Ford Maverick LWB automatic petrol guzzler (gets stuck where Deli doesn't, big pumpkins ) |
|||
Top | |
athol |
|
||
|
wimjack wrote: Hey Guys
I was thinking about buying a Nitro kit for my xb coupe.However I am running straight gas with an imco 425 mixer.Does any one know if you can run nitrous oxide with lpg,Has any one tried it ,If so how is it set up? Firstly, there's the fact that most governments ban nitrous on the street. Certainly, NSW EPA and RTA do. You need to understand how fitting nitrous produces more power from an engine. The power is from enrichment fuel jets in addition to (and in proportion to) the nitrous. The nirous helps to cool the intake to increase density and then breaks down in the combustion chamber to provide extra oxygen for combutsion. The extra fuel burns with this to produce the extra power. On any LPG convertor that works with an impco 425 (which, BTW, is too small for a 351), there will be a primary pressure port (1/4NPT hole) that could be used to feed the fuel solenoid and jets for a nitrous system, but a <b>lot</b> of experimental jetting would be likely to be needed unless you can find someone else who has done it. Alternately, set up methanol on a separate tank, pump, etc. just to feed the enrichment jets on the nitrous system. If you want more power from the engine, here's a checklist for LPG engine performance: * increased compression, * elimination of heating of inlet manifold (edelbrock air-gap manifold or similar recommended), * cold air intake to air filter, drawing air from outside engine bay - preferrably from a high-pressure area such as the base of the windscreen, * regraphed dissy, * extractors, * big enough LPG system. You should do all of these before looking to nitrous. Really. The impco CA425 is offically rated to 287HP. If you're serious, you really want at least an OHG X450 or 2 impcos.
_________________ Athol
|
||
Top | |
tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
Damage wrote: If you do a search on the web you might find something, problem with searching Nitrous Oxide is to many d***head who think they know what they are doing, write articles using Nitrous Oxide name for NOx, NOx is Nitrogen Oxide (one of the smog pollutions to put it simple). Both are pollutants but are totally different except for the fact they contain Nitrogen and Oxygen..
NOx stands for oxides of nitrogen being NO2, NO3, NO4, NO5 and so on. nitrous oxide is just a shortend auto motive name for nitrogen oxide (NO) don't believe me go ask some one who studies chemistry |
||
Top | |
Macca |
|
|||
|
tickford_6 wrote: Damage wrote: If you do a search on the web you might find something, problem with searching Nitrous Oxide is to many d***head who think they know what they are doing, write articles using Nitrous Oxide name for NOx, NOx is Nitrogen Oxide (one of the smog pollutions to put it simple). Both are pollutants but are totally different except for the fact they contain Nitrogen and Oxygen.. NOx stands for oxides of nitrogen being NO2, NO3, NO4, NO5 and so on. nitrous oxide is just a shortend auto motive name for nitrogen oxide (NO) don't believe me go ask some one who studies chemistry Better get your chemistry book out, NO isn't Nitrogen Oxide N²O, better known synonym "Nitrous Oxide to avoid mix ups. http://www.webelements.com/webelements/ ... 24972.html NOx is also known as Nitrogen Oxide (heaps under the same name, can you understand the confusion of using it for N²O) etc etc, probably not known in real terms under Oxides of Nitrogen but probably called that, has many names. http://www.webelements.com/webelements/ ... 02439.html So really neither you or I are correct, but really neither of us are wrong either. There should have been clear names for each Nitrogen compound. One thing I did say, N²O is known as Nitrous Oxide (synonym), never is NO or any other Nitrogen compound known as Nitrous Oxide, other than d**k heads just thinking because the real name is Nitrogen Oxide all the compounds are the same. "Which goes back to my original post"
_________________ 93 Ford Maverick LWB automatic petrol guzzler (gets stuck where Deli doesn't, big pumpkins ) |
|||
Top | |
Who is online |
---|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests |