So Killerbee according to your testing would this apply to superchargers as well since they make boost too or is there any differences.
Why you would NOT upgrade your turbo
- Thread starter Killerbee
- Start date
N2O is the route I plan on going with this year. Everything I've raced in the past I had very good luck spraying it but I always made sure whatever it was I tuned it properly. Only problem I had was a fuel solenoid malfunction twice on my bike and cost me 2 motors in 2 weekends but since with a diesel there isn't one then I'm not conserned. I'll pay my tunner to set up a tune for #2 and N20 with a few other things later this spring after my aduit from the IRS is done
.
.
I'm still trying to figure this thread out. The topic is "Nitrous instead of a big charger", and guys jump in and say: "Absolutely! That's the way to go. Just make sure you run a big charger with it."
Naw, I'm not talking about those running a stock charger with nitrous, which is what the thread is about.
Running a stock charger with nitrous is how Dmaxes first ran faster than 12's. And it's how they first found out about the problem with the rods. But now that there are lots of folk running bigger chargers, plus the experiences with the stock+nitrous trucks, it appears that both setups bend the rods at roughly the same HP, even though on paper it would appear that nitrous is safer.
The stock charger is an excellent piece of engineering. We have far low charger failure rates than other turbo-diesels from what I can tell. And of course, it's excellent for towing, and will support over 500hp on fuel-only.
yes. No different from this perspective.
In other news, IMO this is not a thread to do anything accept put a face on some physical realities of forced induction. Even in that light, it is just one small part of the process. I am not suggesting how power is necessarily best obtained, but I am starting to feel there has to be "recipe" that, by virtue of the stresses, is better than others. We know you can blow the same (stock) motor at 550 HP or 750 HP, depending on the chosen method. At least i think we know that.
No. Don't read into it, not reinventing anything, just trying to grasp it all. I am not the kind, like many, who try lots of things out. I catch a loty of crap for my approach, but I will be doing a crafty install, since I have adopted a real admiration for the way N20 can be beneficial (opinion).
Multiple threads for multiple perspectives. I just like learning and discussing some things, and it has become clear to me in recent years that the induction system efficiencies have so much to do with failure or success.
Here is my stupid opinion on all of this. If we know that there is a very faint line that one can't cross with a stock motor before it turns inside out, what difference does it make how the power is made. Is this about extending the time the motor will last at a given HP wth Nitrous vs Big Charger? There is no way to turn it into an exact science. I don't care how you try to figure it out. You may be able to make a very, very broad assesment that one is better than the other as far longeivity but there will never be two motors that will react the same way to anything we do. Who wants to have a bottle for HP when you can bolt on parts that are there all the time and do no require a re-fill? I'll stick with my bigger charger and leave the bottles to the infants and dodge drivers.
Yeah, I'm not sure nitrous is "cheaper" hp if you go state-of-the-art. 2 bottles (one full, one in use), solenoids, jets, lines, purge, switches, heater, pressure gauge, progressive controller, time spent getting bottles refilled, cost of nitrous, by the time it's all added up, you could probably buy a big charger, which you'll need anyhow to go past 750hp.
Good position Sam.
FWIW, I believe a bigger charger is a 100% foolproof way to lower part throttle economy (and increase full throttle economy). When apples to apples that is. Somebody tell me if that is wrong.
I am only mentioning that as one possible advantage of keeping the workhorse stock VVT.
FWIW, I believe a bigger charger is a 100% foolproof way to lower part throttle economy (and increase full throttle economy). When apples to apples that is. Somebody tell me if that is wrong.
I am only mentioning that as one possible advantage of keeping the workhorse stock VVT.
Last edited:
Yup, its not really a money question, except maybe when applying this all to the cost of a rebuild.
i have a question i think is relative, has anyone proven that that more pressure is exerted on the rods ( cylinder pressure is all we can measure ) with an improper tuned or properly tuned motor on the intake stroke( aproaching tdc )then would be exerted on the power stroke , to prove if this is actually what is bending rods ? i know that leverage depending on were the crank is at is a facture too but just curious if this is a proven theory ?
Detorquing is probably the best route to extend the life of the stock rods, but that requires moving up the RPM range. While nitrous can move up the RPM too, the factory charger will not survive long being used at high rpm.
My truck bone stock = 17-18mpg hwy
My truck with PPE Hot+2 .E.T = 19-20mpg hwy
My truck with PPE Hot+2 .E.T with HTT Turbo = 22-23mpg hwy.
Just another observation comming from me without the help of a college degree or a spreadsheet.
Hmm.. My results are kinda like Sam's
How about the stock IHI?
17-18mpg stock
20ish after Edge
Down to 18 with H2/285 tires
Down to 14-15ish after fuel change
Tuning gained maybe 1 back.
HTT install and match tuning has me over 20 now.
It plays/works a hell of a lot harder now too..
super diesel
<<<< Under Pressure
I have to agree here with Brandon and Sam on this one. I've seen increaded fuel milage with the bigger chargers I've run so far (to my suprise). I was of the mind set that it would go down because it takes more fuel to get it into it's map. It hasn't shown me to be the case (expecially when towing heavy). I'm wondering what would account for this phenomenon? Obviously more of the unburnt fuel is getting used now and why would that be? Any one else experience this?
Last edited:
When I did the math many years ago with N2O vs twins, twins became the hands down winner. I'd hate to think of the cost of filling up enough bottles to run 200+ passes a year, not including the fuel cost to the N2O station!
Then lose the towing advantage as well as the street playing advantage. Oh yeah I forgot dyno sessions.
Then lose the towing advantage as well as the street playing advantage. Oh yeah I forgot dyno sessions.
Last edited: