CryO2 "Cryogenic Intake System"
06-22-2004, 10:45 AM
#26
Human Being
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: plains
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the way I see it (as opinions differ) you have to fill gas up in your car? that is refillable power! 
with the rail it cools the fuel before it is combusted I believe. I am very curious about this system as it seems it is safer to use all the time unlike nitrous! just another piece in the puzzle is all I am looking for. (not saying I am against nitrous!)
with the rail it cools the fuel before it is combusted I believe. I am very curious about this system as it seems it is safer to use all the time unlike nitrous! just another piece in the puzzle is all I am looking for. (not saying I am against nitrous!)
06-22-2004, 10:52 AM
#27
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Location: BHM, AL
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry. I keep editing my previous post.
Anyway, yeah, I agree. It sounds better than NOS because you are manipulating the environment the engine runs in instead of putting something in the engine. I also don't think they claim as big of gains. Anyway, CRy02 seems more natural or something.
My questions, though, is will attempting to cool the fuel to "-81 degrees" freak the ECU out, esp if you had one on the intake? I wonder if you could run the "shot" through the fuel rail, then through the intake so that you don't waste as much?
Anyway, yeah, I agree. It sounds better than NOS because you are manipulating the environment the engine runs in instead of putting something in the engine. I also don't think they claim as big of gains. Anyway, CRy02 seems more natural or something.
My questions, though, is will attempting to cool the fuel to "-81 degrees" freak the ECU out, esp if you had one on the intake? I wonder if you could run the "shot" through the fuel rail, then through the intake so that you don't waste as much?
06-22-2004, 10:59 AM
#28
Human Being
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: plains
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was kinda thinking the same thing. the site is not TOO informative either 
it does all sound good though....I just looked and of course there is not a dealer within 150 miles of me (their search parameters does not exceed 150 miles) might check some other forums to see if anyone has used this?
it does all sound good though....I just looked and of course there is not a dealer within 150 miles of me (their search parameters does not exceed 150 miles) might check some other forums to see if anyone has used this?
06-23-2004, 06:10 AM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Belgique
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Need For Speed
yes i now but the C02 is toxic gas!!
yes i now but the C02 is toxic gas!!
Also, your engine already produce CO (before catalyst oxydation into CO2). And your body produces a lot of CO2 : stop breathing!
06-23-2004, 06:20 AM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Belgique
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the idea of fuel rail cooling, as this could be efficiently done in term of heat exchange. Could be done by re-routing the A/C hoses, maybe. Some issues though wih A/C fuel cooling :
- A/C cuts out under WOT operations, i.e. when you want max fuel cooling effect. However, depending on the size and the material used, the fuel rail would remain cold for a short time due to heat inertia.
- A/C perf as a confort device would be imperred as in very hot conditions, the fuel rail would transfer a lot of the heat to it. Or if you chose to place the fuel cooling AFTER the climate control heat exchanger, the colling effect on the fuel rail would be reduiced (still the preferred solution though).
Now, let's have a look at the workshop manual to see where the A/C hoses are...
EDIT : it looks like it could be done relatively easily, with the right tools. However, I don't believe it will bring any perceived performance improvement. Otherwise, OEMs would already do it.
IKN
- A/C cuts out under WOT operations, i.e. when you want max fuel cooling effect. However, depending on the size and the material used, the fuel rail would remain cold for a short time due to heat inertia.
- A/C perf as a confort device would be imperred as in very hot conditions, the fuel rail would transfer a lot of the heat to it. Or if you chose to place the fuel cooling AFTER the climate control heat exchanger, the colling effect on the fuel rail would be reduiced (still the preferred solution though).
Now, let's have a look at the workshop manual to see where the A/C hoses are...
EDIT : it looks like it could be done relatively easily, with the right tools. However, I don't believe it will bring any perceived performance improvement. Otherwise, OEMs would already do it.
IKN
Last edited by IKnowNot'ing; 06-23-2004 at 07:03 AM.
06-23-2004, 07:38 AM
#34
Human Being
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: plains
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have asked around and still have not found or heard from anybody who has any experience with this system I will keep checking- the line from their site that keeps sticking out in my head is "It is like driving on a early fall day where your car is responsive and peppy, well or something like that
I will keep checking- the line from their site that keeps sticking out in my head is "It is like driving on a early fall day where your car is responsive and peppy, well or something like that
07-26-2010, 10:21 PM
#35
Adrenaline Junkie
One thing I'm shocked no one has brought up about the fuel cooling is the fact fuel has to be in gas form in order to ignite. Cool it too much and you might not get adequate atomization and you're screwed. Personally I think the fuel options are for cars with massive heat soak/vapor lock problems in the fuel lines. (I had this in my old turbocharged Fiero and fixed it with a fuel cooler)
But I have been looking into these systems since I had my old 240sx and everything I've seen is they can be quite effective, specially in a super hot environment where I'm from. (NE Florida)
As for having to hit the button, since you don't have to worry about detonation with these systems it's just as easy to hook it up to a switch. Flip the switch and the CO2 is flowing.
To me if you want to get all you can out of your engine without/before going the forced induction route, the I wouldn't bypass this route. I've seen people do much more stupid things, for alot less power.
Ryan
But I have been looking into these systems since I had my old 240sx and everything I've seen is they can be quite effective, specially in a super hot environment where I'm from. (NE Florida)
As for having to hit the button, since you don't have to worry about detonation with these systems it's just as easy to hook it up to a switch. Flip the switch and the CO2 is flowing.
To me if you want to get all you can out of your engine without/before going the forced induction route, the I wouldn't bypass this route. I've seen people do much more stupid things, for alot less power.
Ryan
07-26-2010, 10:50 PM
#37
Adrenaline Junkie
Gracias sir, in case you can't tell this is something I've looked at for quite awhile. Another thing I've thought up, it may be a "10%" performance gain, but the more power you're making without the system, the more you'll gain. I'm thinking 250hp+ forced induction systems can really benefit form this. Plus anythign that will help add power, and reduce the rick of detonation is a plus to me.
Ryan
Ryan
08-14-2010, 09:46 PM
#42
Adrenaline Junkie
08-15-2010, 01:49 AM
#43
Asshole for hire
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Colfontaine, Belgium
Posts: 3,214
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
it means that collectively ppl think you are doofus. bumping a 6 yr old thread, trolling with some misguided pipe dreams...
and FWIW the FI cars who have a clue what they are doing, dont have elevated IAT anyway.
and FWIW the FI cars who have a clue what they are doing, dont have elevated IAT anyway.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
