Thread: Nitromethane and alcohol ?'s

Tweet

Oh boy,,,,,,,, you guys take me back in time. Yes, the motor shakes,,,, the ground shakes,,,,, and the crew shakes. 80% nitro, a dash of hydrazine, mag locked at 60 deg. lead,,,, and with a good burnout/hookup we were in hotrodder heaven

so i take it you used to be a alkie/fuel racer?

Yes to your question,,, actually I started as a kid with model airplanes running on methanol/nitromethane fuel. In my early teens I was hopping them up to the max,,,, until I went too far with my mods. I applied many skills at the track that had worked for me as a teen,,, I'm shure the same rules would still apply today. I noticed you're running a 301,,, I built quite a number of them and loved the revs. Tell me a bit about your engine and I'll run it on my Desk Dyno for power out put,,, could be interesting

ill have to dig the info out tonoight on the cam and stuff. but i will let you know

I don't think he's old enough---we used to have John Stewerts Dad sign him into the track since he wasn't old enough to get in by himself---but tuffnuff is also from Sac and about the same age as John but I think John is in Houston this weekend

Originally Posted by tuffnuff

Yes to your question,,, actually I started as a kid with model airplanes running on methanol/nitromethane fuel. In my early teens I was hopping them up to the max,,,, until I went too far with my mods. I applied many skills at the track that had worked for me as a teen,,, I'm shure the same rules would still apply today. I noticed you're running a 301,,, I built quite a number of them and loved the revs. Tell me a bit about your engine and I'll run it on my Desk Dyno for power out put,,, could be interesting

what desk top dyno do you have ?

Dyno 2000,,, it's served me well for quite a number of years and I'm familiar with the program. Sure wish the technology was available in my racing days,,, then it was trial and error Peter

Originally Posted by tuffnuff

Dyno 2000,,, it's served me well for quite a number of years and I'm familiar with the program. Sure wish the technology was available in my racing days,,, then it was trial and error Peter

it works ok i use it to look at cams .i want the the Dynomation but i just cant see spending the money right now when i can spend it on other things in the shop

Hi Pat, I agree, it's a tool to guestimate power output. The error margin is not much compared to the human element. I recall making only 1 change at a time and noting the difference in performance on my ET slip years ago (trial and error). Now it's a matter of plugging numbers into the dyno and pressing a button (key),,, and the results are at your fingertips. Unfortunately, the program does not allow for mushroom or large base lifter (faster valve action in terms of crank degrees) nor does it have provision for different rocker ratios on intake and exhaust,,,, I think I need newer software,,, huh Peter

Originally Posted by tuffnuff

Hi Pat, I agree, it's a tool to guestimate power output. The error margin is not much compared to the human element. I recall making only 1 change at a time and noting the difference in performance on my ET slip years ago (trial and error). Now it's a matter of plugging numbers into the dyno and pressing a button (key),,, and the results are at your fingertips. Unfortunately, the program does not allow for mushroom or large base lifter (faster valve action in terms of crank degrees) nor does it have provision for different rocker ratios on intake and exhaust,,,, I think I need newer software,,, huh Peter

or head flow numbers but it good for looking at some things the dynomation soft ware is the one i have been told ?

I found that flow numbers can be deceiving. I ran a blown BB Chev in my boat,,, the heads were fully ported (rectangular ports) one head had a crack between intake and exhaust seat, I didn't trust the head with the 7 lbs. of boost. So we put the heads on my friend's '50 Chev Coupe and the heads were too much for the street. My point,,,, sometimes too much of a good thing is simply too much Peter

Originally Posted by tuffnuff

I found that flow numbers can be deceiving. I ran a blown BB Chev in my boat,,, the heads were fully ported (rectangular ports) one head had a crack between intake and exhaust seat, I didn't trust the head with the 7 lbs. of boost. So we put the heads on my friend's '50 Chev Coupe and the heads were too much for the street. My point,,,, sometimes too much of a good thing is simply too much Peter

hey i have one of them 50 chev coupe but i was more in the flow and heads like big chiefs what the soft ware has no way to put in i runned the big rect ports on the street you just have to move up your rpm but 90 of the time O, ports work ok but i build some big engines for the street if i have to say-so my self

Let's say you're going to build an engine from the ground up for your hotrod. Can you build it so that it could run either gasoline at a lower power or one of these higher test fuels? Thanks for all the info so far. This is what's great about the hot rodding community!

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Let's say you're going to build an engine from the ground up for your hotrod. Can you build it so that it could run either gasoline at a lower power or one of these higher test fuels? Thanks for all the info so far. This is what's great about the hot rodding community!

well for the street i build them around your rpm you will see the most of the time and how much power you need to move it and build around this not the way i would build one for the track you run them were they make power i would not try to build a hi and low test engine but have built them for power adders that would be a better way to go

It is very interesting to hear first hand experiences from folks who have used nitromethane. I have only messed with it and methanol in the lab as chemical reagents so I can only say two things. First, both methanol and nitromethane evaporate more easily than octane and so will be effected more easily by temperature changes than gasoline and second, the ratio of oxygen to nitrogen in the normal atmosphere (air) is about 1/4 but nitromethane is CH3NO2 so the ratio of oxygen to nirogen in nitromethane is 2/1 so yes this compound brings in more oxygen than air AND brings in some CH3 as well. The comment about the need for high compression has to do with the need to split the oxygen off of the nitro group so it can react with the carbon to form CO2 and give off a LOT of heat which expands the gases rapidly. For a nonquantitative discussion of the "early days" of the late '40s and early '50s I recall that up to 10% of nitromethane was added to gasoline (percent volume) for "one shot" drag runs and I also recall an early test in Hot Rod magazine where an ARDUN setup on a flathead block was treated to 10% nitromethane in the gas and put out over 400 HP which was astonishing at the time from a 90 HP block! Then there were pictures of shattered blocks of Ford flatheads with captions indicating more than 10% nitromethane. No one can say when a given peice of cast iron will yield exactly but apparently for a flathead block problems occur somewhere over 10% nitromethane. I have no real idea where the limit is for a SBC and it may be higher with better parts but I think the idea is the same that nitromethane in gasoline is basically liquid dynamite. Compare to other explosives which invariably are hydrocarbons with nitro groups, eg TNT is trinitrotoluene which is just toluene with three nitro groups on the ring and toluene itself is an excellent fuel with an octane rating of over 100. Just some chemical background but I yield to those who have mixed, stirred and sat in the seat of a nitro-fueled car!

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder