all i can say is i use nitrogen and i benefit from it, all i care about is what i do for my vehicle. i could care less about any one else and there vehicles and what they use. in the end, im benefitting and thats all that matters.

 

Do a double blind test, then you might KNOW if you are actually benefiting. Until then, it's just supposition. And humans are VERY good a seeing what we think or want to see. It's the nature of how our brains work unfortunately.

But hey, if you feel better about it and THINK it is making a difference, then more power to you.

My previous life I was a process engineer for a large semiconductor company. That whole job is all about finding out what actually DOES make a difference (and why) and weeding out all the other "stuff" that might look like it makes a difference on the surface, but it actually didn't. For some reason, I tend to be a bit skeptical about many of the claims I see on message boards until they are repeatedly verified by third parties.

And the CLAIMS for nitrogen fills are WAY beyond they science thermodynamics would allow for. As for me, I'll stick to my belief in thermodynamics over the assorted claims made by the people selling this stuff.

 

No. That was a THOUGHT exercise that basically said that if you want a nitrogen fill because you think all that nasty oxygen keeps leaking out of your tires, then just keep refilling it with air and you WILL eventually archive your nitrogen fill you so want. The fundamental assumption of that thought exercise is that nitrogen doesn't leak through the tire while air does.

As for other areas using nitrogen because they find it necessary, true. But these are street cars, not NASCAR nor aircraft. The single main reason aerospace uses nitrogen is because WATER escapes very quickly through rubber (something like 250 TIMES faster than nitrogen), causing more drastic changes in tire pressure. Given that they can run tire pressures up in the several houndred psi range, the percent change amounts to a MUCH bigger pressure change than we could ever see in our car tires.

Also, aircraft tires are subject to EXTREMES of temperature changes that car tires will simply NEVER see. The thermal shock on landing is enourmous and any moisture in the tire will increase the pressure changes seen by the tire.

There is also another huge difference between aircraft and automobile tires: They are usually mounted on multipart rims with a LOT of magnesium in it. The multipart rim (and high tire pressure) means aircraft tires tend to leak a lot faster than car tires. The larger molecule of nitrogen does help slow down this leak rate. And in case you don't know, magnesium REALLY LOVES oxygen, so keeping them apart as much a possible really does help slow down corrosion (especially with high partial pressures of oxygen in aircraft tires).

But none of these issues has any real bearing on your CAR tires mounted on single piece aluminum rims.

NASCAR is another special case where the lack of moisture DOES help them to achive a more consistent tire pressure to a fraction of a pound. But you don't set your tire temperatures to that accuracy. And you don't run your tires NEARLY as hot as they are run in NASCAR (or other racing sports), so the moisture in air just isn't going to have as much of an impact.

All in all, saying "other fields use it, so we should too" is, well, silly. Their conditions are DRAMATICALLY different than ours. So saying "And please don't say their application is different than ours ! It's still a tire on a wheel filled with .....SOMETHING !" is ignorant because the application IS so different that you just can't do an "apples to apples" comparision.

If it makes you feel better, go for it. But don't be trying to "sell" this as some miracle cure to the rest of us. It isn't. It can't be.

 

I agree that nitrogen can have the same expansion coefecient as oxygen. But nitrogen is a "dry "gas. It becomes "WET" when you put oxygen and 1 other element... HYDROGEN... together!! It's the smallest molecule, and by itself is highly reactive...it's FLAMIBLE ! Placed as fuel for a gasoline powerd engine, it has been said to EXPAND 6 times the rate of gasoline ! Oxygen and hydrogen have a very hard time staying apart. It's called water and it's EVERYWHERE ! Even air at 5% humidity is considered WET air, so for every oxygen molecule , there are 2 hydrogen molecules (remember, H2-O = water). Check the expansion coeficience of oxygen AND hydrogen TOGETHER and add the factor of heat to it. Get a large enough volumn of it , it's called steam. You know the various applications of steam ! EDIT Also, once wet air is introduced to a tire,it stays wet air.. that means the oxygen that is in there combined with hydrogen stays together as water! Did you ever break a tire down from its bead only to find water in the tire? It's a residual of fix-a-flat at the very least or several re-fills of compressed air from our atmosphere we breathe.

 

OK do you two (red pony & classix_stang289) even read the posts you reply to?

Do you understand the concept of "communication" or "debate"?

Debate really isn't about verbally pummeling your opponent until they just go away. It is more about the civil presentation and exchange of coherent ideas and relevant information that support your position.

You do realize some of those "lofty" brainiac "people in the know" you are so enamored with are the same people you are arguing your illogic with right here on this forum, right?
Do you understand the "technical" education any degreed engineer has? Do you understand what most ENGINEERS do for a living? FYI: I have owned and operated my own successful Engineering Firm since 1988, at least two other engineers (topbliss & RRRoamer) have spoken up here on this thread against your position.

What exactly is the shield you have keeping you from seeing reality? In your mind what would it actually take for you to admit nitrogen can not provide the near magical benefits you claim it does in this thread?

The benefits you claim result from the use of nitrogen in your tires simply are not possible. Neither of you can provide any data or scientific information to back up your claims. You keep tossing in bits and pieces of words and ideas without any substance, point of reference or connection to our debate about nitrogen versus air in street car tires. Other than nitrogen industry sales literature do you actually have any information to support your position?

The the Thermal-Expansion Coefficient of oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen & water???

Have you ever even looked at a steam table?

If you could produce steam with a little wet air and a hot tire, you could save a lot of time energy and money producing steam for industrial use with your wet air filled tire steam generator...

You might consider a Basic Engineering Thermodynamics Course.


Please take a step back and look at what you are attempting to debate here.

You have contended that a punch list of advantages listed on your www.nitrofill.com website are the benefits everyone will receive from paying to have nitrogen put in their tires.
You act like this silly nitrogen sales literature was your bible.
Yet when I post a line item challenge for you to explain each of their outrageous claims...

You simply choose to ignore it. WTF?


Both of you keep repeating that "we" need to do our research on nitrogen, but the two of you flat out refuse to "do your research"?


How much more obvious would this have to be for you to realize that you have been sucked in on this nitrogen sales scam???

It seems neither of you are even capable of recognizing when you are wrong let alone being able to admit it.

There is a lot to be said about people having the ability to communicate in english about their concepts, ideas and positions.

 

You asked for answers for your "please explain how?" The quickest , least infuriating (to you ) answer I can give you to maybe satisfy your questions wholesale would be maintaining proper tire inflation for a longer period of time and of a stability that temperature doesn't affect (too much ) as far as inflation is concerned, along with non corrosive properties to save rims and retard the effects of dry-rot due to oxidation .I will admit I am not an engineer,nor am I a chemist, but if I am in the company of such, I would love to hear your explainations as to how you come to your conclusions without name-calling and screaming it's a scam ! I did the best I could to explain it to the best of my understanding. Now it's your turn .

 

yep just checked my double blind test, i passed no problems.

now i want you to do a jackass test and im sure you will pass no problem.

 

you dont have to explain yourself to him or anyone else, like i said before being you and I are benefitting from this thats all that matters.

one thing that someone loves another might not, its a part of everyday life its called "opinion"

and in my opinion i love to use nitrogen in my tires, plain and simple.
just like making modifications to your vehicles horsepower, some might get more horsepower from a certain product than another person. not everyone likes the same things and they are having a hard time understanding that

 

I think its time for one of my old man anecdotes from real life.
This is to illustrate the lack of importance of our current subject.
.
Many years ago...
I bought a car that was built the year I graduated high school (mind you this was a long time ago).
At that time, the car was about 17 years old. It still had the original spare in the trunk.
The car had been in the back of a garage and I know no one had touched the spare in about 9 years, but it still had over 24lbs. of air in it. For all I know, no one had ever touched it.
One by one I bought new tires for the car over the period of a couple of months as I got extra money.
At one point, I put the old spare on (pumped up to 32psi.), just for the heck of it (I was still young and daring back in those days).
It didn't last long. A few miles down the highway I could hear the thumping (a familiar sound from the old days of retreads) of the tread coming loose from the tire. I stopped and pulled the flapper off and went the last 3 miles to home.
My point is that after 17 years the tire held air fine, the inside was not deteriorated, but the outside (which had never seen the light of day and looked brand new) fell apart.
That is one of the reasons I am not worried about using air in my tires.

 

what does this have to do with nitrogen in tires? people hardly use retreads due to the fact that they dont work, nitrogen works IMO.

 

Oh brother. That's what I get for even assuming you would know what a double blind test is. On the bright side, it does look like you can pass your proposed test with flying colors.

 

I'll keep this simple for you: what he was saying is that the outside of the tire is going to be oxidizing due to contact with oxygen anyway. And a failed tire is a failed tire.

Oh, and a quick question for you: If you have a high concentration of oxygen (aka: air) on one side of semipermeable membrane (aka: the tire itself) and you have a very low concentration of oxygen on the other side of that membrane, what is the oxygen on the high concentration side going to try to do???

 

Tire was factory issue (you would realize this if you read carefully).
The reference to retreads was my experience from back in the day when we used them and therefore I instantly recognized the noise for what it was.
People don't use retreads because they don't work well on tire with lots of side flex like radials.
We used them back in the day on bias-ply tires. They work fairly well until the sidewalls start to die.
Have you ever bought a new vehicle that came with bias-ply tires? I have. I am that old.
Nitrogen helps eliminate water vapor. That is about all it does.
Dry air does pretty much the same thing. It works too.
The story shows exactly how insignificant the difference is.
Thus the relevance to the thread.

 

What a fascinating read.

The closest local nitrogen-filler to me wants SEVENTY-NINE bucks to fill four standard car tires.

I'll just tuck that money away towards new tires. I plan on wearing my tires out rather much faster in other ways anyway

I will not enter the argument about whether any scientific or performance benefit does or does not exist. I'll just buy more tires!

I like new tires anyway. The big question for me is not nitrogen or air - it's Pirelli's or BFG's? Decisions decisions!

 

It sounds like a familiar and documented problem with , if my memory serves me right, for some reason the numbers 721 rings a bell. Wasn't that a Firestone ? Well, at any rate, the old bias ply tire technology was subject to failure and to find a good long lasting casing is time-sensitive due to the type of materials used at that time. The failure could have been built in.

 

It's going to break down the tire by oxidation . But it would do it from the side with the highest pressure.... inside, because the oxygen that is not bound to hydrogen, is being forced through the casing by internal air pressure. Add the destructive rays of the sun on the outside and a tire decomposes right before your eyes, dry-rot. But oxidation damage without the sun is not so visibly apparent. A story that happened to me. My older brother gave me a pair of tires that sat on a rack mounted and pressurized for over 22 years! They still looked brand new and had the little nibbs left on the tread surface! He never used them. He gave them to me to use and before I got 500 miles on them,they both failed on me and both failures took place about 25 miles apart of each other! They were a brand name tire too. They were not exposed to the sun at all for 22+ years and they still came apart. Oxidation from within trying to get out from the oxygen rich air it was filled with. It's bad enough our tires live in an oxygen environment on the outside. Why compound the problem by internally forcing the oxygen through the pores of the casing from the inside out?

 

i just wanna add that i did 13 nitrofills today for customers and they were all happy. lol

 

you should come by my dealership we charge 50bucks for ours, plus free top offs for future pursposes, road side assistance and few other kicks for only 50 bucks. no bad for 50 smakaroos

 

WRONG
Not a 721. (The Firestone 721 was a radial anyway.)
The car was built before there were 721 tires.
Some other cars had the Firestone 500 back then which was basically the same tire.
The Firestone 500 was the subject of the largest recall in tire history in 1978.
Where were you in 1978?
The car never had a bias ply tire anyway.

 

Where was I in 1978? Let's see, I was 24, working at a body shop and was in love with my wife.... all things change .... some for good..... some for bad. At that point, you might say I was "distracted" when it comes to current events due to my newfound responsibilities. So forgive me for my in-accuracies.