I've been reading, with fascination, the various postings concerning Forced induction and NOS for the Maxima. Recently there was a posting concerning the long term affects of NOS on a Maxima. Personally I feel NOS is a racer kind of mod as the results require a planned attack. But then I started reading about the nearly $10K (if I read it correctly) cost of upgrading an 02 with an SC. The modification seemed to be without cost consideration as I would have thought bumping the hood would have been far less expensive (and to maintain) then running a drive shaft for forced induction.

I have to apologize if my understanding of the mechanics of NOS and forced induction are incorrect. As I understand them, forced induction basically means the cylinder contains more fuel than normal. Whereas NOS basically increases the O2 available to burn (O2 would normally have burned off but is instead freed from the N by the available heat). In either case the increased power is due to increased explosive power of the fuel/O2 combination.

The question posed by the other postings is which is more detrimental to an engine, increased fuel or the increased temperatures. Several people commented about the reliability of factory made Turbo/SC engines in the market whereas there is no equivalent (at least production level) NOS system made (although someone claimed a BMW 8-series with NOS, but I have a hard time believing this is how it came from the factory, but perhaps I read this wrong).

From my perspective the increased fuel (turbo, turbo w/intercooler, SC, etc.) is essentially an increased compression ratio. This would imply a tolerance within manufacturing to support the increase. It would seem that an SC or Turbo could be adjusted such that it would remain within at least a "reasonable" range of the engine's operating pressure. It would be expected that the rings, gaskets, etc. would start failing before any major damage (as if failing rings wasn't major). Whereas NOS is essentially overcooking the engine. Again, this has an operating range but not nearly as easy to over run as induction. Certainly one can watch this as several people have commented as to watching the pistons for overheating.

I'd be curious to hear from people who have run either one or both systems to comment on their long term affects. And by this I mean at least 2 or more years. Thanks in advance.

 

Bump.

No one? Aw come on! As someone who is considering something like SC/turbo/NOS, I would like to hear some educated responses.

Tony

 

when you add nos (nitrous oxide) to your system you are not just increasing the oxygen content inside the cylinders, you are also feeding it fuel, the whole point of adding the happy juice is to dump in more fuel, to create a more powerful "powerstroke" in order to create alot more power to your wheels. If you straight dump in nitrous oxide into the engine without feeding it extra fuel the engine would run lean and most likely meltdown from the excessive heat caused by the poor air fuel ratio.
you are right the o2 does make the explosion bigger in the chaimber, but you just neglected to mention the additional fuel that is poured in there as well. i like to think of it as temporarily bumping up the engine's displacement, more air more fuel. (perhaps it's a bad analogy but that's the only one i can think of at the moment) as long as the fuel mixture is set properly the internal temperatures should stay within' a healthy range. However in most cases the fuel supply is short of it's demand and the engine runs lean then melts down. (not enough fuel pressure for one reason or another)

the benefit of having nitrousoxide is that when the nitrogen and the oxygen molecules seperate in the intake manifold, the nitrogen adds a cooling effect making the air more dense for an even more efficient combustion. IMO nitrousoxide if used correctly should not wear a car out more than a car that's running high boost.