MM Nitrous - Poor Man's S/C???

[Glenn]

Wow! MY first thread in over a year as a net member. O.K., here it is - I cannot afford a S/C, but would love one. I just sold my 1964 Fairlane S/C "K" car and it all went to bills. I'm broke again, well almost. I will be up to 290/300 HP in March. I am seriously thinking of installing a 75-150 HP nitrous system in my MM. But, I do not know very much about Nitrous and 4.6 DOHC engines. I need advice and help! I hope Sarge is listening - need your technical expertise. What are the pros and cons - advisable or not, problems? I just do not know! Advice on brands, parts numbers, can I use a Mustang Cobra unit???? Should I look at 75 HP or go full boat to the max with a 150 HP unit. I need the MM.NET's help.

Thanks,

Glenn

[TAF]

Glenn,

Jim ( jspradii (http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/member.php?u=482) ) has NOS on his Marauder and can probably give you some tips.

[frdwrnch]

Don't Do It! The aluminum block does not lend itself well to the intense cylinder pressure created w/NO2. I'm not saying it won't work, I'm saying it's not good for your investment. I like your goal of 300 hp normally aspirated. That is my short term goal. Work your upgrades towards supercharging. An engine is an air pump. Improve your exhaust system etc, and other upgrades to support added horsepower. Work your way up to your power adder of choice. Nitrous take a heavy toll on your driveline, by the same token you are limited in boost potential w/an aluminum block.So watch and learn from those in the forum w/ pressurized engines to see what works and what doesn't. Good Luck.

[Dennis Reinhart]

Zex has sponsord me a a wet kit, I am going to install it on my car since I am waiting on my built motor. I am not a big fan of N20 but if its done right can be safe and make as much power as forced induction, again it all depends on the power level and the quality of the custom tuning

[SergntMac]

I'm not a fan of NO2 Glenn, my advice is to leave it be. I don't know anyone who's used it on any engine who hasn't had other issues to deal with, either in setting it up, or, rebuilding after the fact. This is not to say that it's bad or can't be done right, however, to my knowledge, there is only one MM on this board using NO2 effectively, and he has a built engine...IMHO.

[89lxbill]

The biggest thing with N2O is safety. You will need a custom chip or Steeda Timing adjuster to retard the timing and a Kenne-Bell Boost-a-pump is a good idea to have also. 75hp is more than likely safe with the stock pump, but a trip to the Dyno can ensure that. I have a friend who has a 93 LX Mustang 5.0 with the stock Hypereutectic pistons who has been running 150hp shot for years and has no problems, but "fat is where it's at" is my motto for N20. It's better to be a little rich to ensure safety. Luckily you can get a custom chip burnt with an alternate program for N20 that will retard your timing and give you more fuel at the same time for just when you need it. But this is something that has to be done with dyno tuning. Not cheap, but still cheaper than a supercharger.

[Zack]

When used properly its probably one of the safest mods around.
If I was you, I would have the car dyno tuned while spraying the nitrous.
You cant adjust your distributor anymore to take out some timing, so this is the only safe way to do it.
Get a flip chip and you're on your way.
And get yourself a remote bottle valve so you can open the bottle from the drivers seat and stomp on anyone at the stoplight!!

[Glenn]

Thanks everyone for the great response on my Nitrous question. Good food for thought. I am going to continue to gather information on a Zex wet system for 125 HP (several PMs recommended this system). I have not made up my mind, but will continue the research.

Dennis could you please keep us informed of your work on the Zex system for the MM. Any test results, tuning, installation issues, etc. would be very helpful.

Thanks,

Glenn

[Shankin]

The kit will really wake that thing up! If you use your head the nitrous will be work just fine. Its people that have never used it that are scared of it. With your car having the pethetic pistons i would keep the hit under 125. if you do decide on the kit wait til you see the torque numbers on the dyno.:beatnik:

[MarauderMark]

my mechanic told me to use no2 instead of blower .he said that the bearings in the blower aren't to good and to make the bearing problem for blowers better that the bearings to use would cost about $5,000.00 just for the bearings.he also said that nos would be the way to go as long as your careful not to overdo it.. i have been thinking of nos to since he told me...

[woaface]

Nitros is cheating...not like a supercharger or a turbo where the engine is making that power.

[jspradii]

Nitros is cheating...not like a supercharger or a turbo where the engine is making that power.
Huh??????:bs: Cheating who? An N/A motor with nitrous is STILL an N/A motor. Need to go to school on why nitrous works and how it works, and why some of the highest performing cars on the pro and sprtsman's circuits use both supercharging and single or multi-stage nitrous systems.:burnout:

[89lxbill]

Cheating? Only if you are racing in a class and you get caught :) A familiar old saying is run what ya brung and hope ya brung enough. Nitrous is only supercharging you motor without the supercharger. You are basically forcing the motor to be more efficient. Read up on it. You will be pleasantly suprised.

[sailsmen]

All NOS does is carry more oxygen than atnosphere. All S/C does is force in more atnosphere to carry more oxygen.

That bearing thing for S/C is BS :bs: . Several mfg are offering S/C as OE. Several aircraft engines are S/C.

Turbos did have bearing problems in the 1980's but those have been address .

[Dennis Reinhart]

All NOS does is carry more oxygen than atnosphere. All S/C does is force in more atnosphere to carry more oxygen.

That bearing thing for S/C is BS :bs: . Several mfg are offering S/C as OE. Several aircraft engines are S/C.

Turbos did have bearing problems in the 1980's but those have been address .

I agree with the bearing BS he is out to lunch on that one

[TripleTransAm]

he said that the bearings in the blower aren't to good and to make the bearing problem for blowers better that the bearings to use would cost about $5,000.00 just for the bearings.

He is probably getting confused with Muffler bearings. Those are the ones that are expensive to manufacture, much more than the bearings used in blowers. Blower bearings usually last a long time, but you can extend their lifespans even further by running a separate cooling line from the headlight fluid reservoir... this has the nice side effect of allowing you to run a thinner weight of oil, thereby reducing the chance of your subwoofer rattling.

[SergntMac]

Nitros is cheating...not like a supercharger or a turbo where the engine is making that power.
I disagree. It's not "cheating." It is one way to add power to a naturally aspirated engine on a limited budget. It's inexpensive, and it's relatively easy to install without modification to the base engine.


An N/A motor with nitrous is STILL an N/A motor.
I disagree. It is one way to add power to a naturally aspirated engine on a limited budget. It's inexpensive, and it's relatively easy to install without without modification to the base engine. It's not "cheating," but it's not a "naturally aspirated" engine anymore.


All NOS does is carry more oxygen than atnosphere. All S/C does is force in more atnosphere to carry more oxygen.
I agree. It's a power adder.

[TooManyFords]

I disagree Mac. An engine is either naturally aspirated or it has forced induction. NOS alone falls under the former, not the latter. If you mix NOS with a blower or a turbo, then it is forced induction because of the blower or the turbo, not because of the NOS. In other words, as long as the engine is relying on vacuum of the pistons to pull air in, it is naturally aspirated. Just because the NOS makes that air more potent does not change this. Otherwise, running your car in 32 degree weather with denser cold air as opposed to the hot 90 degree summer air would not be considered N/A under your definition.

Besides, where N/A and Forced is talking about a mechanical function and I would see NOS being a chemical reaction. What if I add octane boost and alcohol to my fuel, am I no longer N/A?

I think the final litmus test is that forced and natural deals with the hardware, and NOS, gas and air deals with the fuel that is burned in the engine. Two different concepts. S/C give you more HP through mechanical means, NOS gives you more HP through better chemistry. (damn, sounds like my college days! Hmmm....)

Cheers!

john

[sailsmen]

Steve, I too have had real problems with my muffler bearings.

With it wrapped around my neck I have no idea where I am! :confused:

[Dr Caleb]

Muffler bearings? I'm having difficulty too. I think my piston return springs have a little ticking noise to them. Any thoughts on what grease to use on the fittings?

[SergntMac]

I disagree Mac. An engine is either naturally aspirated or it has forced induction. NOS alone falls under the former, not the latter. If you mix NOS with a blower or a turbo, then it is forced induction because of the blower or the turbo, not because of the NOS. In other words, as long as the engine is relying on vacuum of the pistons to pull air in, it is naturally aspirated. Just because the NOS makes that air more potent does not change this. Otherwise, running your car in 32 degree weather with denser cold air as opposed to the hot 90 degree summer air would not be considered N/A under your definition.

Besides, where N/A and Forced is talking about a mechanical function and I would see NOS being a chemical reaction. What if I add octane boost and alcohol to my fuel, am I no longer N/A?

I think the final litmus test is that forced and natural deals with the hardware, and NOS, gas and air deals with the fuel that is burned in the engine. Two different concepts. S/C give you more HP through mechanical means, NOS gives you more HP through better chemistry. (damn, sounds like my college days! Hmmm....) Cheers! John
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, John, I'd love to entertain this discussion, however, it won't see any fair play in this thread. Until one of us opens a new thread for this discussion alone, I'll step back.

[Sactown]

He is probably getting confused with Muffler bearings. Those are the ones that are expensive to manufacture, much more than the bearings used in blowers. Blower bearings usually last a long time, but you can extend their lifespans even further by running a separate cooling line from the headlight fluid reservoir... this has the nice side effect of allowing you to run a thinner weight of oil, thereby reducing the chance of your subwoofer rattling.
I've had better results prolonging the life of muffler bearings using the taillight reservoir, but I haven't solved the rattling problem, so I'm going to try the thinner oil. Have you tried the gear oil/antifreeze atomizing jet method at all? I read on another board that it is useful in NOS applications.

[jspradii]

I've had better results prolonging the life of muffler bearings using the taillight reservoir, but I haven't solved the rattling problem, so I'm going to try the thinner oil. Have you tried the gear oil/antifreeze atomizing jet method at all? I read on another board that it is useful in NOS applications.Seems to work for me!

[deerejoe]

Seems to work for me!



I've never run better without it.

[TooManyFords]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, John, I'd love to entertain this discussion, however, it won't see any fair play in this thread. Until one of us opens a new thread for this discussion alone, I'll step back.
Mac, I think the discussion of NOS and how it affects the definition of N/A is just as appropriate as any other thread. Besides, we don't get brownie points for creating new threads here, do we?

If not, then by all means open a new thread and we can continue. I would love to hear your thoughts on this, so think away!

John

[SergntMac]

IMHO...

I believe a nitrous powered car is not naturally aspirated, and my rationale begins with defining "bone stock."

Bone stock means you have changed nothing from the OEM design. You may change with certain specifications for max performance, such as tire pressure, synthetic blend lubrication and air filter elements, because these things get changed in owner maintenence programs anyway. Upping them to meet your personal choice is not a change in OEM specifications, and it's questionable at best, if any real performance is gained. Your're still bone stock...IMHO

Once you begin to change specifications such as engine temps (stat), combustion (plugs), and aspiration (cold air kit) you're not bone stock anymore. You're "modding" the OEM specifications by changing, or, adding parts with enhance features that are sure to improve performance in some manner.

Indeed, the specifications for "mods" have been compacted into "stages" allowing us to determine if any race, or, performance index is carried out in a fair manner, showing honest results we all depend on for guidance in modding our own cars.

If someone were to post here that they ran a 14.0 ET "bone stock," I would have to challenge them. Either the condition of the car, or, the manner in which the ET was collected, needs to be looked at again, out of fairness and honesty. Maybe someday, someone will run a 14.0 "bone stock." and then we'll all learn more about this mysterious MM. Until then, with all the possible combinations of "stages," and probable performance improvement, the next threshold we seem to agree on, is natrually aspirated vs. forced induction.

There are more that a few ways to import nitrous into the combustion process, but all of them begin with a pressurized delivery system. This pressure delivers the nitrous by "force." Most nitrous systems require "internal" modification to the base engine, either by drilling into the air intake, or fuel systems. My point is, adding a nitrous system is invasive to the base design, and it's a fuel enhancement delivered by force.

Turbochargers and centrifugal superchargers are not invasive, they are powered by the engine, but from the outside of the engine. They replace the OEM air path. OTOH, roots style superchargers are invasive, internal to the base engine, but it's a moot point, yes? All three are "power adders."

A nitrous system may not qualify as forced induction in the manner we define superchargers, or, a turbocharger, but it is something other than "natural." This needs to be better defined, maybe "forced aspriation?"

I don't know all the racing associations, but I'm fairly confident right now that nitrous is considered one of the three "power adders" by most association rules. I'm reading up on NHRA stuff now, preparing for Indy.

Well, this is my logic on it all, a nitrous powered car is not "N/A." IMHO.

[MarauderMark]

He is probably getting confused with Muffler bearings. Those are the ones that are expensive to manufacture, much more than the bearings used in blowers. Blower bearings usually last a long time, but you can extend their lifespans even further by running a separate cooling line from the headlight fluid reservoir... this has the nice side effect of allowing you to run a thinner weight of oil, thereby reducing the chance of your subwoofer rattling.I only said what the guy told me .i never had a blower to know this .whats worse this person is installing my parts .can't wait to see if i make it home when i pick up my mm or how long it will last:bows:

[Sactown]

I only said what the guy told me .i never had a blower to know this .whats worse this person is installing my parts .can't wait to see if i make it home when i pick up my mm or how long it will last:bows:

:eek:Appologies for having fun with your post. Didn't realize this could cause angst for you during your install. I trust all will go well. :up:

[jspradii]

IMHO...

I believe a nitrous powered car is not naturally aspirated, and my rationale begins with defining "bone stock."

Bone stock means you have changed nothing from the OEM design. You may change with certain specifications for max performance, such as tire pressure, synthetic blend lubrication and air filter elements, because these things get changed in owner maintenence programs anyway. Upping them to meet your personal choice is not a change in OEM specifications, and it's questionable at best, if any real performance is gained. Your're still bone stock...IMHO

Once you begin to change specifications such as engine temps (stat), combustion (plugs), and aspiration (cold air kit) you're not bone stock anymore. You're "modding" the OEM specifications by changing, or, adding parts with enhance features that are sure to improve performance in some manner.

Indeed, the specifications for "mods" have been compacted into "stages" allowing us to determine if any race, or, performance index is carried out in a fair manner, showing honest results we all depend on for guidance in modding our own cars.

If someone were to post here that they ran a 14.0 ET "bone stock," I would have to challenge them. Either the condition of the car, or, the manner in which the ET was collected, needs to be looked at again, out of fairness and honesty. Maybe someday, someone will run a 14.0 "bone stock." and then we'll all learn more about this mysterious MM. Until then, with all the possible combinations of "stages," and probable performance improvement, the next threshold we seem to agree on, is natrually aspirated vs. forced induction.

There are more that a few ways to import nitrous into the combustion process, but all of them begin with a pressurized delivery system. This pressure delivers the nitrous by "force." Most nitrous systems require "internal" modification to the base engine, either by drilling into the air intake, or fuel systems. My point is, adding a nitrous system is invasive to the base design, and it's a fuel enhancement delivered by force.

Turbochargers and centrifugal superchargers are not invasive, they are powered by the engine, but from the outside of the engine. They replace the OEM air path. OTOH, roots style superchargers are invasive, internal to the base engine, but it's a moot point, yes? All three are "power adders."

A nitrous system may not qualify as forced induction in the manner we define superchargers, or, a turbocharger, but it is something other than "natural." This needs to be better defined, maybe "forced aspriation?"

I don't know all the racing associations, but I'm fairly confident right now that nitrous is considered one of the three "power adders" by most association rules. I'm reading up on NHRA stuff now, preparing for Indy.

Well, this is my logic on it all, a nitrous powered car is not "N/A." IMHO.Fluid dynamics and Chemistry 101 - What Nitrous Oxide is, What It Does and How it Works.

Definitions: Natural : Not forced or artificial
Aspiration: The act of breathing
Natural Aspiration; Breathing that is not forced or artificial
N2O: Two molecules of Nitrogen attached to one molecule
of Oxygen

Super and turbo chargers force air into the combustion chamber using overpressure created by the charging unit. This is not natural or ambient air flow, and I would assume everyone would agree with that. Nitrous Oxide is "introduced" into the normal flow of the air pump, just like ambient air. It volatizes upon release from its injection nozzle into the regular intake stream. In this regard, it is considered an air additive, because none of its power is created outside of the combustion chamber.

N2O is a stable and inert gas until it is locked into the compression cycle of the cylinder. During compression, once the temperature reaches 570 degrees F, N2O breaks down into its base elements, Nitrogen and Oxygen.

When this exothermic decomposition occurs, N2 and O2 result, and 3 moles of gas are produced from 2 moles, which provide extra boost to the piston as well as liberating more heat. Other benefits include: More efficient combustion of the fuel; nitrogen buffers the increased cylinder pressure controlling the combustion cycle, and; the latent heat vaporization of the N2O reduces the intake temperature (remember, colder is better).

One would think that pure oxygen would be better. Oxygen is extremely combustible, and a safe method of delivering it has never been realistically developed; the stuff is simply too explosive. Even if it could be, it would only aid combustion volatility, and the excessive heat generated would rapidly become a problem. N2O controls heat and carries products of combustion away quicker.

Air has only 21% oxygen at sea level, the rest being largely inert nitrogen. While nitrogen does not aid in combustion at all, it does absorb energy and expand and carry away heat. N2O delivers an additional 36% oxygen to the combustion process, and is 50% more dense than air at the same relative ambient air pressure, delivering 2.3 times as much oxygen per cubic foot of air as the same amount of ambient air. Along with additional fuel, this greatly increases the power produced within the same compression/combustion cycle. N2O provides more usable oxygen molecules and can make a great deal more power than pure oxygen alone, and with all the side benefits of the nitrogen, and without the safety problems using compressed oxygen would present.

All of this takes place in the cylinder during induction (normal), compression, ignition, and exhaust, all of which use the engines own air pumping capability without forced measures. This is why N2O engines are considered naturally aspirated, because they don't "breathe" any differently with N20 than without it.

N2O injection produces performance like a super/turbocharger, or a compression ratio increase in that, during combustion, it dramatically increases dynamic cylinder pressure.

N2O's use is specifically limited to certain classifications of cars per NHRA and IHRA, but only because the nitrous add on, like any other power adder, is not considered stock. The NHRA rulebook considers N2O engines not otherwise super or turbo equipped as naturally aspirated engines. It's strictly the nature of the breathing of the engine that is taken into account.

Speaking of breathing, a good dose of the stuff is known to give one a great tendency to giggle uncontrollably. They don't call it "laughing gas" for nothing. Don't try this at home, however.

Hope this sheds some light on the widely misunderstood nature of N2O.

Cheers!:beer:

The long and short of this rant is to make clear that N2O is not "forced", by compression or otherwise, into the induction stream. Its magic occurs once it's in the cylinder itself.

[SergntMac]

Thank you Jim, most do not appreciate how much thinking, or, typing, goes into a thoughtful post here. I do, and I appreciate your thoughtful reply.

I am not swayed by your argument. IMHO, nitrous remains a power adder more similar to having a blower of some sort, than not. In a sanctioned race anywhere, you should not run among the N/A cars. It's just not fair to them.

[martyo]

The long and short of this rant is to make clear that N2O is not "forced", by compression or otherwise, into the induction stream.
Jim: You know I love ya bud, but I can't agree with you on this. Go look at that bottle in your trunk and tell me what that little round gage says...I think you will have to agree that the contents of that bottle (NOS) is indeed under quite a bit of pressure. The contents (NOS) is indeed compressed and it is that pressure that forces it into your cylinders.

I rest my case.

[martyo]

I am not swayed by your argument. IMHO, nitrous remains a power adder more similar to having a blower of some sort, than not. In a sanctioned race anywhere, you should not run among the N/A cars.
I am inclined to agree with Mac on this one. I don't belive you would be allowed to run in the N/A events that I have been in with NOS.

[TooManyFords]

While Jim is technically correct and just went further than my post did, a car plumbed with NOS breathes normally, thus it is correct to say it is Normally Aspirated. The engine is just an "air pump". As long as there is less than 100% atmospheric pressure at the intake valve, the car is pulling a vacuum and is normally aspirated. NOS is nothing more than a fuel additive.

Some have argued that because the NOS is under pressure that it is pressurizing the intake. Not true. If this were the case, we could claim that the fuel injectors themselves were guilty of this and that all FI motors were not N/A. NOS is simply a fuel "additive" like anything else that gets atomized by a carburator or FI nozzle.

No, what this thread is dancing around is the "fairness" of such a modification. And, by the sounds of it, maybe a little ego? (hey, ego is not a bad thing!)

Is it fair to run a NOS enhanced car against one that is not? No! There simply is no comparison! Is it more fair to run them against those with blowers and turbos? Absolutely! Again, no arguments! Is that car with NOS and no mechanical enhancement to reach more than 100% atmospheric pressure (PSI boost to everyone else) still naturally aspirated. YES.

So, what I see is that those without the "big three" power additions want to play King of the Hill in the N/A catagory and keep those that "on a technically correct level" with NOS out of their sandbox.

I don't have a problem with that either. The ONLY reason I played the :bs:
card in the first place was that the thread was heading down the "missconception" path and the facts are more important. Call it the voice of reason or the "educated voice" if you will. I just want to see it presented correctly.

Cheers!

john

[Sactown]

Jim: You know I love ya bud, but I can't agree with you on this. Go look at that bottle in your trunk and tell me what that little round gage says...I think you will have to agree that the contents of that bottle (NOS) is indeed under quite a bit of pressure. The contents (NOS) is indeed compressed and it is that pressure that forces it into your cylinders.

I rest my case.

The pressure in the bottle acts much like your fuel pump, delivering the fuel to the engine. This is simply the best way to deliver it due to its physical properties. N/A is still occuring, there is just a fuel additive being introduced. This is not to say that NOS should be ignored in classifing cars at the track, obviously there is a difference. But IMO, N/A should not be used as the distinction because both with and without NOS is N/A.

[GarageMahal]

These well rounded 'arguments' are what make this site great. I must have changed my mind 3 times over the course of this thread. Very enlightening.


jta

[Dr Caleb]

But IMO, N/A should not be used as the distinction because both with and without NOS is N/A.

I agree with you there. Marty's distinction that because N₂O is pressurized, therefore it's being 'forced' air is flawed. Any gas will liquefy if it is compressed, and at the right temperature. Water is a gas when it's temp is increased over the boiling point, and Oxygen is a liquid at or below ~100 Kelvin.

You could increase the oxygen content of the air going into your engine by vapourizing liquid oxygen in the intake, but carrying around liquid oxygen in your trunk is only advised if you're Wile E. Coyote.

What all these things do; Turbos, S/C, NOS; is enrich the oxygen content of the incoming air and thereby increase it's combustability. (Is that a word?) I'd suggest using 'oxygen enhanced' or something rather than Normally Aspirated to describe NOS.

[SergntMac]

These well rounded 'arguments' are what make this site great. I must have changed my mind 3 times over the course of this thread. Very enlightening. jta
I agree.

I was shy to get involveed in this discussion because I felt it would soon turn into something else. It did not, and I am pleased that I had my turn without having to bend over for stating my opinion.

I also agree, out of "fairness" again, that there needs to be a better understanding of the nitrous experience. There also needs to be a better classification for it. Maybe "pressurized" is just a fuel delivery system. Maybe not. Maybe "injection" is the same as ordinary FI injectors. Maybe not. Maybe "natural aspiration" is natural. Maybe not. In any event, it's been worth the "shot."

[TAF]

I agree with you there. Marty's distinction that because N<SUB>2</SUB>O is pressurized,
I think the REAL question is...

Glenn, how the heck did you get that little "2" down there to show the formula for nitrous oxide?? :confused: :D

[MM03MOK]

I think the REAL question is...

Glenn, how the heck did you get that little "2" down there to show the formula for nitrous oxide?? :confused: :Da mean like this? N<SUB>2</SUB>O Glenn's the cat's ass!!

[jspradii]

I think the REAL question is...

Glenn, how the heck did you get that little "2" down there to show the formula for nitrous oxide?? :confused: :D
Now you know that Glenn can't give THAT secret away!:eek:

[MM03MOK]

Now you know that Glenn can't give THAT secret away!:eek:Only us geeks know for sure!.... ;)

[tetsu]

Y'all are nuts! :)

Why debate the semantics of n/a vs forced etc.

Let's face it, there's no replacement for displacement!

It's time for someone to wedge a built 460 under a gigantic outlaw cowl hood on one of our Marauders!

Who'll be the first to backhalf and tub theirs? :lol:

[Glenn]

You know, as I was reading the Trilogy installation manual tonight (what a beautiful unit), It suddenly dawned on me, I am too immature a person to handle a full time S/C. Also, I do not know if I would want the constant gear noise (I know its not loud). If I go Nitrous, I have only 1 1/2 minutes or less of gas to use. Just enough to shut down a few ricers. I do not really honestly think I could responsibily handle a full time S/C for 450 HP. My limitation I guess - not yours. I just could not resist getting into that S/C ALL the time. Not only is the Nitrous option the poor man's S/C, but maybe even a safer option for us safety challenged drivers. I have enough problems handling my modest 266 HP. Food for thought. I hate this talking out loud.

[SergntMac]

I hear you Glenn.

You're not alone.

If rear wheel torque could be sex...Nevermind.