RV.Net Open Roads Forum: General RVing Issues: Anyone Using CO2?
RV Community | RV News & Reviews | RV Sales | Plan a Trip | RV Clubs & Services | RV Camping DealsRV.net
Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Help and Support  |  Contact

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in General RVing Issues

Open Roads Forum  >  General RVing Issues

 > Anyone Using CO2?

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 3  
Prev  |  Next
wa8yxm

Wherever I happen to park

Senior Member

Joined: 07/04/2006

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/26/08 07:32pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

RamTX wrote:

I don't believe CO2 is considered an inert gas by definition.



Where as I believe it is, and my degree is in Science

However it does not matter


That said www.powertank.com


Nothin adds excitment like something that is none of your business
John is Near Kenwood TS-2000 housed in a 2005 Damon Intruder 377


Aridon

SE Florida

Senior Member

Joined: 06/06/2007

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/26/08 08:21pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Why do people believe stupid things? Seriously, the size difference in O2 and N molecules is so small its not even worth considering. People want to feel better about spending $5 a tire to fill up.


2008 Newmar 4330 (Modified)

Chemgoddess1

Suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio

Senior Member

Joined: 07/29/2002

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/28/08 09:55am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

It was my understanding that it was not size that mattered.....

N2 does not have the same heat capacity as O2, tires stay cooler therefore having less issues with thermal expansion while driving. Cooler means the molecules are not as active which means they are not migrating out of the tire as quickly. While this may be an issue for race cars and those doing a lot of driving in warm climates, it probably is not so much for the rest of us.



1984 Sportscoach Pathfinder 33'(purchased 7/02)
Me (Pam)
John (husband, campground wedding 8/02)
Ian (14 yrs)
Ben (12 yrs)
Quincy (spoiled rotten Jack Russell)
Chloe (very lucky rescue furkid)
Spike (Iguana)


live well, laugh often, love much

BCSnob

Knoxville, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/28/08 11:06am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I seriously doubt the difference in specific heat capacity of nitrogen (1.040 J g-1 K-1) and oxygen (0.918 J g-1 K-1) accounts for the difference in tire pressure changes with temperature. What is important is moisture content (water vapor: 2.080 J g-1 K-1) in the gas and possibly the reactivity of the gas (reactivity: oxygen > carbon dioxide > nitrogen). The main advantage of the air alternatives is the ease with which they are available with low moisture content and possibly the availability of them in liquid form (gasses compressed to liquid form take up less volume).

Mark (trained to pile it high and deep in chemistry)

Mousefart

New Jersey

Senior Member

Joined: 08/15/2004

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/28/08 11:25am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

tatest wrote:

Chemgoddess1 wrote:

Shearwater wrote:

Nitrogen molecular weight (N2) = 28
Oxygen molecular weight (O2) = 32
CO2 molecular weight (CO2) = 44

Nitrogen molecules are NOT bigger than oxygen or CO2.


Ummmm....molecular weight has nothing to do with molecular size. Size of O2 is ~ 2.96 A, N2 ~ 3.16 A. It has to do with the electron energy an the size of its cloud.

So I guess all tires have been carefully designed to be 3.05 Angstrom osmosis membranes, so as to separate the molecules, and leak out only the oxygen?


Yes, it's a conspiracy to get us to buy Nitrogen of our tires!!


Paul (Mouse)

2007 Flagstaff Shamrock 17 Hybrid (heavily modified for boondocking and winter camping).
2007 Dodge Dakota Quad Cab 4x4, 4.7L HO, factory tow, 3.92 gears.
Equil-i-zer Hitch, Prodigy.
Yamaha EF2400 Generator (quiet, cause I care!)


TAS

Baton Rouge, La

New Member

Joined: 08/25/2007

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/28/08 12:31pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I've got a CO2 set-up for my jeep and I love it. I like the portability of it. there ARE cheaper ways to air up. CO2 just seems to do it quicker than any 12V compressor I've ever used. I'm a very impatient person and I like thinks to happin quickly. Well...not that but, most everything else! lol


Todd
07 Dodge 2500, 4x4, CTD, 6spd
98 TJ w/ a few mods
01 Rockwood 8292s (just starting this adventure)
84 Jayco pop up (Sold but not frogotten)

Chemgoddess1

Suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio

Senior Member

Joined: 07/29/2002

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/28/08 04:22pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Mark, then why is this so prevalent (N2) in racing? I always thought it was that it keeps the tires cooler.

....not trained to pile it high and deep but have learned from the years of stepping in it!

Cloud Dancer

San Antonio and Livingston TX USA

Senior Member

Joined: 06/08/2001

View Profile


Posted: 04/28/08 04:46pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Chemgoddess1 wrote:

Mark, then why is this so prevalent (N2) in racing? I always thought it was that it keeps the tires cooler.

....not trained to pile it high and deep but have learned from the years of stepping in it!


The reason we used it in racecars is because the pressure remained constant, or more so than compressed air. In dirt Sprint Cars, the pressure was selected anywhere from 4 to 18 psi, in 1/2 psi increments, depending on racetrack traction character and moisture content. Therefore, constant pressure was an advantage.


Willie & Betty Sue
Miko & Sparky
2003 41 ft Dutch Star Diesel Pusher/Spartan
Floorplan 4010
Blazer toad & Ranger bassboat

BCSnob

Knoxville, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/29/08 04:35am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Cloud Dancer wrote:

The reason we used it in racecars is because the pressure remained constant, or more so than compressed air.
Were the temperature induced pressure changes less with nitrogen than with compressed air due to differences in moisture content or the lack of the other gasses (pure nitrogen vs. nitrogen/oxygen/argon/carbon dioxide)? Gases with low moisture content are readily available when produced from "pure" liquefied gases.

There were scientific instruments in grad. school that required a very low moisture content atmosphere in order to make proper measurements (for example: Michelson interferometer) and we used the nitrogen gas that boiled off a large tank of liquid nitrogen. This yielded nitrogen that had 0.000000002% moisture (20 ppb by volume).

Mark

K3WE

Missouri

Senior Member

Joined: 05/24/2005

View Profile

Offline
Posted: 04/29/08 06:34am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

wa8yxm wrote:

RamTX wrote:

I don't believe CO2 is considered an inert gas by definition.



Where as I believe it is, and my degree is in Science

However it does not matter


That said www.powertank.com


I think that the original poster is talking about the "noble elemental gasses" which are called noble because they are relatively inert, and yes, C02 is not an elemental gas.

And, I also think that "inert" is a relative term. Solid C02 sealed in a coke bottle at room temperature is pretty explosive.

(No degree in chemistry- just took a bunch of it).

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 3  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  General RVing Issues

 > Anyone Using CO2?
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in General RVing Issues


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2008 RV.Net | Terms & Conditions | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS