Hmmm, nitrous, meat eater, interesting thought. Most of us are pretty
comfortable running carbs and gasoline. We have been doing it a long time
and its rather forgiving. I will admit, with nitrous, there is a steep
learning curve. Lord knows we have burned several set of pistons (burned a
set on plain gasoline also) as well as pushing at least one set of head
gaskets out the side. Tuning on the Dyno will help to get it right before
you take it to the track, but there is a lot to running nitrous beside
changing jets, as I found out a WOS this year. However when it is right it's
a bunch of power. Don't know what percentage of Nitro/Alcohol you would have
to use to equal N2O but I bet it would be way up there. And that's a whole
other learning curve to climb.
John Beckett
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jane McMeekin" <jmcmeekin@worldnet.att.net>
To: <land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 11:09 AM
Subject: "E" Engine x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
> Keith,
> Nitrous is great for making gobs of power, but it's a meat eater. Exotic
> stuff looks neat, but will it give you enough extra bang for the buck to
> justify the additional cost? From what I'm hearing fuel engines seem to
> be a little easier to satisfy than unblown gas jobs so you might want to
> keep it simple. You could use the 2.8 crank, an iron block, a decent
> pair of iron heads, maybe some steel four bolt main caps and add good
> rods and pistons. Use some of those old parts stashed in the garage -
> the whole thing could be built for a few thousand dollars. Keep the revs
> down to 8500 or so and feed it a ton of gas. Best of all, when she
> blows, you say bye, bye.
>
> Skyhawk will get an "E" transplant for next season. Don't know what kind
> of an engine yet, but if all goes well, it'll be an odd ball. You know,
> limited power potential, no after market parts, and found only in some
> obscure Chinese province.
>
> Keep the "E" ideas coming.
|