The F119 power modification thread

N20

HP is easy as heck to make but engine longevity is extremely difficult.

Big block chevy I would N20 it until the bottom end went out the back of the car, not so expensive fix. Ferrari bottom end $$$$$$$

 

I have done an amazing amount of nitrous in the old days. The new stuff is even better and far from crude. When we talk about flowing a head, making bigger valves, that means talking the head off at a minimum. Direct port NO injection is was less invasive. And in a similar way that a head is flowed if you were scared of NO/fuel flow in a dry designed manifold you can "flow" the manifold or better yet you can EGT individual exhaust ports. Either will prove concept.

The best thing about NO is that you don't mess with the reliability of a stock motor. Any power adder including flowing heads, big valves, light valve train, oversized pistons, can come at a reliability cost unless engineered well. We see this reliability problem all the time in motorsports especially at the club level because there is barely th budget to build let alone engineer or test for reliability.

 

Nope! All you do is send the car to churchs just like you have done for the past Stooge chip tests. Sean can at the crudest level monitor the 10 second blast to redline and WOT with his wide band 02 and tell you what the mixture is. You would need more to determine individual cylinder mixture but doing a church evaluation will get you very close without having to dump in gobs of fuel to be safe. 10 seconds of NO is not going to destroy any cats. 348 breaks all speed limits in 8 seconds! Unless you are on a racetrack you are not going to empty a bottle of NO in one event. And the 2.7 does not see the NO and does not care. That is one the best parts of NO. No effect on Smog when off and invisible to the ECU for the most part.

 

I already have 500hp and burn rubber in 3rd gear...stock! But if you write me a check for $1000 or what to crowd fund it I will be glad to put it on and we can dyno it at Churchs. I have a full bottle of NO in my garage right now. Lets do it!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

24 years ago I was bored thinking I could get more HP out of my old tired 308gts. I decided to rebuild it and blue print it. But before I did that I ran NO through the motor until I ran out of jets! I could never blow that motor up. I took the motor apart and all was well within spec. I wasted my time taking it apart for a minuscule increase in horsepower and reliability. The problem with NO is when you run it improperly. If a 348 motor can take 400 or 500hp as E suggests why do people fear getting that 400 from NO but are perfectly fine doing it with turbos, induction, head mods and the like? NO is just another tool. If we are making track cars then NO is no way. But we are talking streetcars that break the law in 1st gear and double legal speed limits in under 15 seconds stock. More power is cool but just means you break the law faster. I'm not really sure how much fun that is?

 

I have Nitroused many cars in my youth and nitroused 3 Ferraris. I proved that concept two decades ago. On a street car NO is just as viable an alternative for power as any other forced induction or internal engine mods. The best answer comes after evaluating all the compromises.

 

Yes, I regularly test systems on our dyno which is the basis of my opinion. The base kits are still basically what they first started out as, very crude.

Sure you can buy a progressive direct port system with all the gadgets you can think of but it gets very expensive.

I've seen more engines lost to nitrous than anything so not sure how you aren't compromising the reliability. Especially with a base system that spikes the torque on a 90deg line, or used on a Ferrari with little access to retard timing.

Even if one did say invest in an expensive system to do it properly and tune it best as possible, I still don't like the idea of having a power adder that will run out, or having to compromise the naturally aspirated tune up. (colder plugs and reduced timing would be proper)

Any money invested in a naturally aspirated or forced induction combination is there every time you put your foot in it and not gone when the bottle runs out.

I know plenty of people who run nitrous and love it (mostly drag racers), it's just not for me.

 

Ernie, that is an interesting graph. The 348 is definitely stronger down low but I think the spread may be amplified by the use of 4-1 headers on the 355.

Stock 4-2-1 seem to help what little torque they have under 5k. Are your headers 4-1 or 4-2-1?

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/348-355-sponsored-bradan/482742-95-berlinetta-dyno-2-7-vs-world-%3B.html

 

LOL

Quote of the month

 

Each person has their own compromises. I agree with that. The fancy NO expense is certainly a fraction of good internal engine mods. On paper internal engine mods are easy. In fact they are anything but. Remember the famous Fchater who tlked the talk and rebuilt all the nice 355 motors that turned out not to be so good? Enginefixer was it? And that was a pro. Keeping th 90 degree spike to a lesser percentage of total engine output solves the heavy hit problem. You need to be progressive with NO if you really juice it good. 99% of the time NO is off and the longevity of the motor is stock OEM. When you do an internal engine mod without fine engineering you get that extra load all the time 100% of the time and that kills reliability. As a race we see all the time guys turing up the rpm a few 100 or putting a bigger cam and kaboom goes the motor. It is not easy to adequately figure out the chess game of power vs. reliability. The good thing is Ferrari don't get many miles of even if a motor only lasted 20k miles that could be a decade for some people's garage queens. Adding fuel and NO does not require cold plugs or retarding. Other forced induction does. We see that with turbo'ed stock motors.

 

Hey if you go to church's let me know maybe I schedule a tune for my racecar. I'm just too lazy to do it. If you need to weld the flange to the cat I got TIG and MIG.

 

Yes trust me, I've seen my fair share of people spending money only to go backwards.

As for nitrous, agreed progressive is much easier on it. Disagree on the plugs and timing unless you are talking less than 100hp jet.

Put 100+ through a stock Ferrari with stock timing and plugs and post up a picture of a spark plug. It's not gonna be right.

 

Yes. To add to my previous comment, I think moving to the 4-1 on the 355 with cam timing set to make peak power at 8250 hurts the low end more vs the 348 set up to make peak power at 7200.

Unless the 355 on the Fabspeed chart is just an anomaly, the low end is way down compared to mine with stock headers.

In comparison, the 4-1 Fabspeed 348 is somewhat similar in terms of torque curve to your 4-2-1 setup below 4k. (though your new headers were a nice gain above that)

 

I agree. More trying to illustrate the loss of low end on the 355, I think your move to 4-2-1 was a good one.

 

Interesting info on your headers, Ernie. If it was in the original thread I don't remember reading it. Really wish someone offered a set of off-the-shelf 4>2>1 manifolds for the 348. I don't suppose your fabricator made a jig when they built yours?

 

This is my new favorite thread.

 

+1 .....interesting thread