friend of mine put nitrous on an eclipse.. it iddn't last much longer... 75 dry shot i think it was. it's been rebuilt, about 7,000 miles and it still runs fine.

same car has a cam, supercharger, different heads..... plus a big roof scoop (adds "downforce"), big wing (more "downforce"), body kit, and a carbon fiber hood, not to mention big weird purple paint job.

what happens hwen the engine gets hotter is the pistons expand just slightly... everytime you run you car. thats why a warm engine can sometmies be harder to start than a colder engine. when you put nitrous inside the combustion gets hotter... thus expanding your piston, and getting the block hotter. you don'th ave to take a block to it's melting temperature to get it hot enough to slightly mess up the shape of your cylinder just enough to screw your engine up... which is what happened to this eclipse. as anyone who's used an oven probably knows, heat travels through substances... so the heat from the cylinders can go through the engine block... thus 'causing problems if used incorrectly.

okay... so 99 times out of 100 is probably an exageration...

but you ahd to rebuild your 3800 you say? i wonder why....

 

how bout we drop this subject b4 we turn into another fink situation

 

Ok, thats one example of a nitrous install that went wrong- don't you think there are tons of examples of ones that work right too? I had a buddy with an eclipse blow his engine after putting a new turbonetics turbo on (basically ran out of fueling because he wasn't monitoring anything)- that doesn't mean I go around talking crap about big turbos, and saying how they'll blow your engine. You see where I'm coming from?

When I was at college last year- we had about 5 or 6 guys running various amounts of spray on relatively stock cars (a couple hondas, a couple LS1s, and one mustang fox 5.0)- and many of them were daily drivers- some of them going through a ton of spray on hot street racing weekends (particularly the LS1s). Nitrous doesn't necessarily destroy every car its in. Some of those guys were more about making as much money as possible racing, and would rather put $1k into a good fuel, monitoring, and nitrous setup than to spend $4k+ on a turbo setup with similar results. I'm not saying that makes them any better because they're cheap- but if the OP doesn't care to make the car faster daily driving, and only really wants the improvement when he occasionally hits the track- nitrous fits that bill personally.


Thanks- I have taken 2 thermodynamics courses in college, as well as quite a few materials classes as well- I know that metals expan with heat. What you are trying to say is that the excess heat from nitrous (a 75 shot in this case) could be enough to warp the cylinder bores enough to destroy the engine.

Lets step back and think about that for a second- where does the heat in the engine come from? Nitrous alone doesn't burn- so it can't come from there, the oxygen going into the engine doesn't burn either- so it can't come from there. Therefore it has to come from the fuel. With fuel- only so much energy in it actually goes to make power- the rest is wasted out the cooling system and out the exhaust pipe. So lets say you inject a 75 hp shot of nitrous- and you add the corresponding amount of fuel to hit your desired A/F ratio (lets say 12:1, 11.5:1- whatever).

You are correct in saying that this extra amount of fuel over stock is adding more heat into the block, heads, coolant, pistons, etc - that is obvious. But if that were the issue- then think about doing a supercharger kit, or doing ported heads and a cam- something that also adds the same 75 hp. The same amount of extra fuel is added, and thus roughly the same amount of extra heat is added to the engine as well. It doesn't matter if you add the power NA, nitrous, boosted- whatever. Adding 75 whp with any manner is going to take roughly the same amount of extra fuel, and is going to add roughly the same amount of extra heat.

If the problem was excess heat from that- then how are guys running 400+ whp on stock bottom ends? They still run the same piston and bore as a stock engine, but the extra heat from the fuel they are using doesn't cause the engine to be destroyed. If nothing else- think of the L32 (still a 3800)- it still runs the same exact bore size, and same exact piston OD as the L36 that the OP has, but makes an additional 60 hp from the factory. If you are correct, and the excess heat (from the added fuel to make that 275 hp he wants)- then why are people not grenading L32s left and right when they make 260 hp?

You see what I'm getting at? That argument just does not make sense. Just because it is nitrousmaking the extra powerdoesn't mean that the engine is specifically going to get significantly hotter than the same engine making the same power NA or boosted (actually I'd think the heads would run cooler since you're inputing intake air below freezing as opposed to an M90 setup feeding intake air of 250+*F.

Seriously man, why keep talking crap about stuff you have no idea about? We can have an adult discussion here if you'd quit taking jabs at crap. Since you want to try and make me look like a retard- here is why I 'had' to rebuild my 3800:

-I bought a used L67 with about 60,000 miles on it that was about 6 years old. I wanted practically every part of my swap to be brand new- and buying a crate 0 mile L67 is not financially practical (ie $4k+). I also wanted to up the compression ratio with forged and coated pistons, balance the bottom end, check all the clerances, and make some minor modifications to the oiling passages and such for better oil flow- as well as upgrade all hardware to studs. Lastly, I wanted to put a ground finish on my decks so I had less hassle sealing the MLS gaskets.

So no, I didn't rebuild my 3800 because I was a moron and blew it- I rebuilt it because I wanted a much stronger foundation that I will NEVER have to mess with again.

Like I said before- you shouldn't rip on things that you know little/nothing about - you don't know anything about me or my engine- so why take cheap shots at it?

 

well.. i'm sorry you can't seem to handle it whensomeone disagree's with your own views.

if it offends you so badly, why don't you block posts from my name? if it ruins your life to see my views, fine, i won't post on this topic in the future if it gets to you SO badly.

as for the guy who started this, sorry you ahd to read our little fight. i hope you are happy with whatever decision you end up making. please come back for more help, i'm sure bumpin96 here would be more than glad to help.

as for me... if you want ot know my experience.. built a whole 1950 Chevrolet truck from the frame up. rebuilt a 302 for a 1977 Ford pickup when i was 13 years old, truck since sold.(with help from my dad both times.. but i was there when 95% of theo work was done).

i'm done here.. see ya guys

 

hmm interesting little tassle weve had here...ive been wrong about things before and have been corrected (to the benefit of the member with the question) i still stick to my original statement...the engine(if done properly) is more than capable to handle it...depending on the shot i could see having to replace the compression rings and possibly a piston if u forget to turn off the activation switch and accelerate to quickly just daily driving one too many times...the thing that always got me about nitrous was the sudden jolt to the tranny(which happens with turbochargers and superchargers but not to the extent of nitrous)...i have looked at nitrous as a possbile mod but decided to stick with saving money for a turbo kit because my tranny is still in good condition

 

and i wouldnt know the proper way to install it

 

sorry folks I belive we have discussed this long enough and are now just beating a dead horse.
the answer comes down to the same thing as all have said.
It is your choice to do it or to not do it.
there have been good statments from both sides so i read them and make a choice i guess.

But im shutting down the thread we dont need the arguments here .