Wow, pretty cool. www.designengineering.com

The CryO²™ is a revolutionary new, award winning product designed to reduce the temperature of the air/fuel intake charge thus creating power. Through the science of aerodynamics and cryogenics Design Engineering has developed a system to harness the cryogenic properties of liquid Co2 to lower the air/fuel intake charge by up to 60%. The system is modular and can be easily expanded. The CryO²™ system provides two methods of cooling the air charge and one method of cooling the fuel charge all utilizing the same burst of liquid Co². Co² is readily available at any welding supply shop or where paintball guns are charged.

 

Just found this on ebay. Seems pretty cheap, just not sure how the results would be as sprayers just don't yield big results. But with liquid CO2 being sprayed as opposed to water, might make a diference.

DEI Intercooler Sprayer Item number: 2429714603

 

CJV who used to reside over on the 996TT board used something similar on his monster 996TT.

 

You can go ask him at 6speed online. The webiste he resides at now.

 

LOL More assclown engineering from the makers of the electric turbo!

I am currently working on a horsepower boosting system that allows the user to have COMPLETE control over the amount of power applied to the ground. This remarkable advance in automotive power is made possible through years of dedicated research and design. And best of all, it is almost free!

As you can see, this system produces a tremendous amount of torque off the line, perfect for drivers seeking lower 1/4 mile times!




This system has also been seen in the classic American film, Fast and Furious!

 

Water944T, what the heck are you talking about?

Are you concerned about the intercooler cracking when hit with CO2? or what?

Colder air is denser, denser air has more oxygen, more oxygen = more power...

 

M'kay. If you think a whippets worth of CO2 is gonna do it for ya sparky, fire it up. You really think spraying a half second of CO2 is gonna chill the entire IC enough to actually do jack ****? I went to the site, and the tank looks good for maybe 1 minute of gas flow at the rate needed to offset the temps generated by the turbo at say 90 degree ambiant, is that supposed to help anything other than Fast and Furious stoplight assclownery?


I stand by my claim of assclown engineering until we get some tech.

And I would rather have $5 worth of tolulene in my gas to boost my octane, than a few degrees of IC chill. And if that thing is $150, I can run hundreds of miles with rocket fuel in my car, and still afford a cheeseburger and fries.

P.T. Barnum woulda loved this stuff.

 

OK, and I know someone here knows the formula to determine temperature/horsepower gains. Isn't it something like 3-5 degrees per pony?

 

I didn't look at the size of the tank, but that is something that can be easily changed.

Well, PV=nRT

So...lets say this system reduces intake temps by 25 degrees...very reasonable, yes?

The air in the intercooler is at 15psi above ambient, or about 30psi total. This comes out to about 2 atm. Lets assume a volume of 1L to make things simple. R is a constant and when using ATM, it is .0821 if I'm not mistaken.

So that leaves us with (2 atm)*(1 L) = (n) * (.0821 L*atm/mol) * T

For the first example, lets plug in a value of 325 degrees Kelvin for T.

That gives us .075 moles of whatever gas we're dealing with.

Now lets drop the temp to 300 degrees Kelvin.
Now we have .0812 moles of whatever gas we're dealing with.

Thats about an 8% increase in the number of moles of this gas that are present.

Lets say we have a 300hp car...now we have a 324HP car.

Now that was with a 25 degree kelvin drop (same as a 25 degree celsius drop), which is nothing unbelievable...correct?

Any flaws in my logic? I'm not sure that 8% more air = 8% more power, but it makes sense...dont it?

 

Yeah, I got a flaw in your miracle.

I would be astonished if this system produced more than 5HP net gain at any temperature.

Flaw #1.
You are giving a volume of 1L. How many seconds does it take your turbocharged car to gobble 1L of air at ~600CFM? (again, like you I am using approximated figures) (1 Liters equals 0.0353147 Cubic feet )

So, if by some miracle of physics you could run your engine on .035CFM of cold air, yeah, you might see a pretty substantial increase. But in the real world, that 1L of air is gone in about a 100th of a second. Not much time to spool the turbo, if you ask me.

Flaw #2
That transfer of energy also has to take place through an Al barrier, which is much slower than a air/gas combination, while being constantly battered and offset by ambient air forced through the IC by the (assumed) forward motion of the vehicle. Unless you are proposing injecting this CO2 directly into the intake? I certainly hope not.

And I do not think that your proposed temperature decrease of 25 degrees is reasonable with a CO2 gas flowing mixed with ambient air over an aluminum intercooler at even 45MPH. I would be surprised by a 10 degree intake drop, assuming you could apply sufficient cold gas from this hypothetical gas cylinder. Which by the way adds weight to your vehicle, which must be figured as a net loss in this whole scheme. Figure a 20# tank weighs roughly 38lbs. plus all related mechanicals for operation. And I would guess that a 20# tank, wide open since that would provide the best possible cooling, is good for about 15 seconds.

Wow?

 

Response to flaw #1:
You can change that volume to whatever you want, its an irrelevant part of the formula beacuse we're working with percentages.

Response to flaw #2:
Well, there's theories for everything including that! We can actually figure out the temperature drop, but it would require some variables that we dont have handy and can't easily measure (or make up).

The only real way to prove it aside from a lot of math, is to test it by measuring before after temps of the I/C with the system on and with the system off. Then compare the temp drops and differences in acceleration, and we have our answer...

 

I think that this thing might have an application in a super high HP drag car, where time was less important than that tiny increase in short-term performance. But we are talking about fractions of a second. In order to get any real performance from this system, you would need to flood the IC surface with CO2, which dramatically reduces the time your gas will last. And as the speed of the vehicle increases, you need to increase the flow of CO2 to stay even, much less continue to reduce temps.

As I said before, this is in the electric turbo and cross-drilled rotor category.

But, if you want to buy one and dyno test it, feel free. I for one would love to see the numbers. Just remember that the dyno will not simulate the same airflow that a car in motion sees.

 

Irrelevant? Tell that to your engine.


Lets say we sub in this number:

600 Cubic feet equals 16990.1 Liters


That is 16,990L of air through the system every 60 seconds. So now instead of an 8% difference, it is more like a .00008% difference.

That is one minute of operation. How many gas cylinders do I need to run this gee whiz system for a single minute? Should I buy a bigger car, or maybe a tanker truck?

 

I wouldn't waste time dyno testing it, as you said it wouldn't properly replicate the airflow.

Using the Road Dyno (search google for more info) would give accurate results, though.

You make a very valid point with regard to airflow.

I'll try to get in touch with the company and see if they will sell it for a reduced price if I do some testing on the unit...

 

Adrial,

I want you to know I am not trying to mess with you, I am just very very skeptical about this kind of crap. If it was such a good thing, dont you think someone would actually use it? It wouldnt violate any NASCAR or CART rules that I am aware of.

Occam's Razor, man. It is bogus with a capital B.