Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,150 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I bought the Nano 4500 universal. The vendor gave me a starting jet and nano gave me a starting jet as well. There is a fairly large difference in recommendations. I plan to contact then again today to see if we cannot agree on a increased fuel jet. I am aware that the nano pressure assist will increase the flow of nitrous 20-25%. I am currently using a .031 fuel jet. My nitrous vendor wanted me to start with a .037 pill, while nano recommends a .034.
Nano rec is based upon their tables and they stated it was different because they go by jet surface area? I am unable to come up with the math on nano re-jetting.

I have a safety cut out for wideband and pressure, so my thoughts were to set enable the high and low cut off for my A/F and swap to the recommended re-jet size and see what my A/F is from a run. If it is too rich, the nitrous will shut off.

Once I get in the proper A/F range I can start with the new plugs and doing the plug analysis immediately after the run stuff to make sure all is happy.

For those with NANO experience, can you comment on what fuel jet I should start with. I know it is better to start a little rich and go leaner.

I would like do this at the strip and not on a dyno. Nano states a new tune is not required just the proper jet. I believe my timing will be fine but that will be revealed with the plug analysis.


http://www.gmhightechperformance.co...tion_system_nitrous_pressure_games/index.html
 

·
Registered
2010 Escalade, 2010 CTS-V Sedan
Joined
·
431 Posts
I never got that deep into nitrous jetting, but I had good luck using a 2 channel EGT on the #7 and #8 header.

I used a stand alone fuel cell with adjustable fuel pretty regulator to dial in the A/F. probably not the most ideal or repeatable process, but I wasnt trying to break any world records either.
 

·
Registered
Cadillac
Joined
·
992 Posts
The "Less is more" theory applies here. The smaller jet is the way to go to start out. I wouldn't rely on any manufacturers data. Really, what are the chances That they have done testing on an LSA based forced induction motor? Nano is touting better efficiency through better bottle delivery. So your jet size would at a minimum be your smallest NoS jet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,150 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
Brad from Nano got back to me and they have done bench flow analysis. He said I definately want to use the .034 pill and it will yield the same result in AF as the dyno. They created the Nitrous re-jetting and fuel rejetting tables based upon orafice area, not orafice diameter. That is why my math was not working out.

The tables I was referring to can be found in this manual on page 7. You either reduce the nitrous or up the fuel jet.

Jet sizes are same for 3000 or 4500 series. One would think that the jet size would differ on the 4,500 vs the 3,000.
I confirmed this was not the case.
http://www.nanonitrous.com/pdfs/NANO3000.pdf

Product bought
http://www.nanonitrous.com/pdfs/NanoOM.pdf
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top