How Much Would You Pay To Go A Lot Faster - Reliably

[nitro2]

Paulie has a good point.

This forum likely isn't the consumer you are targeting. Guys here live to understand the internal combustion engine, and you won't see most even consider a product until understanding the science behind it.

I'm paraphrasing a colleague, but "In God we trust. All you other fuckers bring data and a damn good explanation."

If you know who I am, you'll know there will be science behind it and lots of it, with high level data to back it up. Right now I'm just looking to see if there is any point in pursuing it, or just sitting on it. I agree though ST is not ideal in terms of who would be buying it, however, ST has a lot of smart people on it.

[nitro2]

I wouldn't pay anything without knowing what it is and how it works. Not trying to be funny, but a pie in the sky hypothetical question makes me want to put my wallet in my pocket and walk away.

JMO,

paulie

There's nothing pie in the sky, nor hypothetical, about it, keep your wallet in your pocket, but don't walk away.

I wouldn't expect anyone to buy such equipment with even the best of data, a demonstration would be required. Its hard to miss a 2 or 3 second reduction in ET. But lets not get way way ahead of ourselves here, its only the first few hours of a discussion on a forum, definitely not time to start making out checks.

[Kevin Johnson]

I think I have a fairly good idea what it is about. You should pursue it.

[289nate]

Plenty of people would pay $50 per pass for a potential 100% increase in power if that's what you're asking. To me it would be a question of the cost to add this to an engine. Is there a ballpark figure for that?

What I'm talking about, peak cylinder pressures wouldn't go up much so on low compression engines the peak pressures are still in the category of low to medium.

This caught my eye and has me totally stumped for the power increase you're talking about.

[kirkwoodken]

Someone, somewhere will remember it. I was there too. And "No!", I'm not thinking of the turbo-encabulator or something from Kale Auto, although it does sound like a Kale offering.

[Kevin Johnson]

Many air amplifiers utilize the Coanda effect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1h8al5lcdM

It is a good exercise to think about the research that Clint has been doing and simply extrapolate. I will leave it at that.

[plovett]

I wouldn't pay anything without knowing what it is and how it works. Not trying to be funny, but a pie in the sky hypothetical question makes me want to put my wallet in my pocket and walk away.

JMO,

paulie

There's nothing pie in the sky, nor hypothetical, about it, keep your wallet in your pocket, but don't walk away.

I wouldn't expect anyone to buy such equipment with even the best of data, a demonstration would be required. Its hard to miss a 2 or 3 second reduction in ET. But lets not get way way ahead of ourselves here, its only the first few hours of a discussion on a forum, definitely not time to start making out checks.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I think this is a pointless discussion. If you have a product that can do what you say it does, then yes many people will buy it. I think you already knew that. But it's all a moot point here until it's not theoretical. Heck, even theoretical we could discuss. We haven't even reached that point yet.

This feels more like marketing, building hype. I realize you may not want to give away your idea. So if you can't talk about what it is, then get it to the point where you can actually talk about it before presenting it.

JMO,

pauile

[2.2=8]

[quote][How Much Would You Pay To Go A Lot Faster - Reliably/quote]

I would pay a lot, But only if I was the only one that had this device. If everyone can access this, then we are all once again equal.

[twl]

Many air amplifiers utilize the Coanda effect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1h8al5lcdM

It is a good exercise to think about the research that Clint has been doing and simply extrapolate. I will leave it at that.

Now, imagine using an air amplifier like that, but instead of using compressed air, use compressed nitrous!

[englertracing]

Back around 1958-61, Chevy division was supposed to have offered for sale a type of compressed air "supercharger" using an air compressor mounted on the engine and an air tank mounted in the trunk. Since it was supposed to be a blow-through, it may have provided its own mixture compensation. It worked on the principle of blowing air through/past a venturi and drawing in more air from speed of the air discharge from the nozzle. Much like a lab vacuum pump driven from a water spigot. There may be more info on Google, but I haven't looked yet. Of course it will work, but just like nitrous: limited by the size of the tank. As long as the amount of air getting into the engine is greater than N/A, you would see an increase in power. Plus, this would have the added benefit of expanded cooler air being blown into the intake. Would also need a high flow regulator to maintain consistent mixture. A reed valve most likely couldn't hurt.

Chevy called it "Turbo" something, as I recall. Something like this?

I was there in '58-61, reading all the car mags, haunting the Chevrolet dealerships and don't recall anything being offered for sale even close to what is described above.

It might have shown up in a Popular Mechanics following the article about a flying car coming on the market next year.

my friend who is about 65 told me about this system.

[nitro2]

I wouldn't pay anything without knowing what it is and how it works. Not trying to be funny, but a pie in the sky hypothetical question makes me want to put my wallet in my pocket and walk away.

JMO,

paulie

There's nothing pie in the sky, nor hypothetical, about it, keep your wallet in your pocket, but don't walk away.

I wouldn't expect anyone to buy such equipment with even the best of data, a demonstration would be required. Its hard to miss a 2 or 3 second reduction in ET. But lets not get way way ahead of ourselves here, its only the first few hours of a discussion on a forum, definitely not time to start making out checks.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I think this is a pointless discussion. If you have a product that can do what you say it does, then yes many people will buy it. I think you already knew that. But it's all a moot point here until it's not theoretical. Heck, even theoretical we could discuss. We haven't even reached that point yet.

This feels more like marketing, building hype. I realize you may not want to give away your idea. So if you can't talk about what it is, then get it to the point where you can actually talk about it before presenting it.

JMO,

pauile

Thanks for the clarification. My turn to clarify a bit, this isn't marketing or hype, we don't have a marketing department and I'm not kidding about that. Having a product that does what it claims and makes at some sense, or sense to some, doesn't actually mean that people will buy it in droves, been there, done that, and still living it

If we were to consider taking this to a level which could be marketed, it is most likely that we would market it through, or sell it to, a bigger company that could market it appropriately.

As far as the thread goes, I'm just interested in whether people would be interested in buying such a product, based on the product meeting claims and costing approx. what I mentioned, probably $500 to $1000 for the setup then the $50 a run. These are ballpark numbers, if it could be cheaper in the end great, if not well not so great, but for now those are the numbers.

It takes time (ours) and money (ours) to go from A to B, so this would not be undertaken lightly nor happen overnight. There is no pressure to develop it, we could just as easily keep it in-house (right alongside our sonic flowbench ) and leave it at that, just thought I'd see if there was any real potential to go beyond that.

[CamKing]

I don't care how low you keep the cyl pressures. If you make 1,000hp from an engine built for 500hp, you will decrease reliability. You can't double the torque output, and not increase the internal stresses in the engine.

Better have good insurance. First time that 1,000hp shot spits the crank out, and kills the driver, or someone watching, the lawyers will be attacking from all directions.

[Fordracer347]

I don't care how low you keep the cyl pressures. If you make 1,000hp from an engine built for 500hp, you will decrease reliability. You can't double the torque output, and not increase the internal stresses in the engine.

Better have good insurance. First time that 1,000hp shot spits the crank out, and kills the driver, or someone watching, the lawyers will be attacking from all directions.

Just getting back to the thread here. This is what I meant when I was talking about claims. Engine damage, and more importantly resulting crashes. It doesn't really matter in our world anymore what your release waiver or disclaimer says. They can still bankrupt you due to court fees and attorney costs.

The cylinder pressure is going to have to go up by quite a large margin unless you are working with something besides air. The individual stresses are going to be quite a bit higher on components. As an example, lets look atJr.'s 200k mile vortec 350 powered truck. Its got lots of miles, engine makes 250hp now and has reduced oil control due to extra wear. Now lets put the same engine under load with Nitro2's wiz bang system for another 250hp so now its making 500hp. The engine is gonna be turning more RPM, putting quite a bit more stress on everything involved. It loses a rod brg and shoots parts through the side, oil down, skid, crash, lawsuit. Daddy is a lawyer and Jr. got hurt because of your system. Doesn't matter that Jr. was being stupid and your disclaimer should keep you out of legal trouble. Daddy can make your life a living hell pretty quick.

In all fairness, this is something that everybody in business for themselves has at least thought about. You can't be a prisoner to it and you can't let that be the sole deciding factor on your life decisions. I don't mean to rain on your parade but since you are talking to a technical group, its all speculation until we get at least the simplest idea of what type of thing you're talking about.

Edelbrock would probably work a deal with you and you'll be the next Bill Gates. I really hope for the best for you in this endeavour because I'd be excited to see a product like this on the market. As for right now, its like talking about my K2500 454 powered suburban getting 50MPG with "this one simple trick".

[vwchuck]

How much weight does it add?

[140Air]

There's nothing pie in the sky, nor hypothetical, about it, keep your wallet in your pocket, but don't walk away.

I wouldn't expect anyone to buy such equipment with even the best of data, a demonstration would be required. Its hard to miss a 2 or 3 second reduction in ET. But lets not get way way ahead of ourselves here, its only the first few hours of a discussion on a forum, definitely not time to start making out checks.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I think this is a pointless discussion. If you have a product that can do what you say it does, then yes many people will buy it. I think you already knew that. But it's all a moot point here until it's not theoretical. Heck, even theoretical we could discuss. We haven't even reached that point yet.

This feels more like marketing, building hype. I realize you may not want to give away your idea. So if you can't talk about what it is, then get it to the point where you can actually talk about it before presenting it.

JMO,

pauile

If there is a patentable idea, it would be foolish to even hint at what it is OR its effects without first applying for a patent. If a patent has already been applied for then being obscure is not necessary. If it is an application of knowledge in the public domain that has been missed for the last 150 years... that's hard to believe.