Originally Posted by Trexthe3rd
Yes, the water will reduce the intake temp, but don't forget when your are injecting water into the combustion chamber the water must displace certain amount of air, less air = less power. So if you are holding on to the hope of increased power from WI reducing the intake temp, think again. Here is a quote with dyno verification. If you are looking for power gains, you are better off spraying water on the intercooler.
The big myth is that WI cools the intake charge, resulting in more hp. All WI does is reduce combustion chamber temps, which is where the detonation protection for rotaries comes in. It does not cool the intake charge by evaporation and make it more dense (your intake temps would have to be super high for that to happen, and by that time you've got other problems); this is why you don't just bolt on WI and get instant hp. Bell was referring to tuning very aggressively using only WI, which I agree is taking a risk. But using it as a safeguard without any real negative effects, or even tuning a little on the aggressive side to take advantage of its lower combustion chamber temps? I see no problem with that. |
"A water injector on a turbo car is a poor excuse band-aid for not doing the job correctly the first time." - Corky Bell With properly sized turbos and intercooler, water injection is unnecessary. For people trying to push the stock twins on a 13B-REW too hard and get away with it... |
Originally Posted by jimlab
For people trying to push the stock twins on a 13B-REW too hard and get away with it...
|
I have a CoolingMist kit on my non-intercooled, centrifugally-supercharged FC. Currently, the intake filter is sucking in super hot air (up to 170 F, I have a thermometer next to the filter) from the engine bay, so that is not helping my ridiculous intake temps. My intake temp sensor is located just before the throttle body (about 12 inches from the water injection). Last Saturday, I drove the car around until the intake temps got to 179 F and did a pull from 20-90. The intake temps dropped to 138 F about 10 seconds after the pull and then began to rise again about 1 degree every few seconds.
Is the water injection doing anything? It's hard to say. With the intake temps so hot, the car is definitely down on power as opposed to when I first fire her up in the morning, allow the coolant temps to warm up, and then do the same pull; however, I like having the peace of mind that detonation will likely not occur. I've done no tuning for the water injection either; however, I am running stock timing with an S5 motor and 6 psi. My AFRs are probably ridiculously rich (got 11 MPG last tank), but for some reason, the dyno operator did not measure the AFRs when I made my 230 whp pull. I haven't yet decided whether or not I'll install water injection on the FD. If it does nothing more than give me an extra layer of protection on an already well-tuned car, it certainly can't hurt. |
Originally Posted by Kento
If you want to talk about myths and misconceptions, you can start with "water displacing the air, less air = less power".....
Although "1997" may show up in corky's book, his wi example quoted with Vegas and carburators suggests that part was written/conceived long ago. I think it's great if done right, esp where 91 aki gas is all that is available. To tune specifically for it, you would need a water flow meter, and/or a knock interpreter for the PFC that could reduce danger if water inj stopped .. ie fuel or ign cut, etc. |
here are some comments from somewhere out there...I did not correct spelling errors....you may notice some familiar names
|
What about the issue of running 50/50 mix with alcohol? I've heard of this being done but never have found out the details. Work better than straight H20? Are they referring to Methane?
|
Originally Posted by Turborx7s
What about the issue of running 50/50 mix with alcohol? I've heard of this being done but never have found out the details. Work better than straight H20? Are they referring to Methane?
|
Originally Posted by rynberg
Let's get the full context. It sounds like he was talking about either replacing the intercooler with water injection or by relying on water injection to do all the cooling. I would agree in THAT context.
But to say that water injection has little place is a bit short-sighted. It DOES lower knock levels AND intake air temps. It also prevents carbon build-up in rotaries. These are all proven effects and are certainly beneficial. I would not tune my car depending on the water injection but you can bet I'm going to run it as a safety net, especially with 91 octane gas. It's true that race gas would be a better solution but that is too expensive and not readily available. The last time I checked, distilled water was cheap and readily available. :) I love them apples. the only reason people are running WI on these forums is for safety. a bit of a backup to prevent pinging and losing a motor. after going thru three motors, that feature gives me at least a little piece of mind. you dont run out of water in the middle of a run unless you are retarded and forget to fill it when you fill your gas. j |
^LOL I was filling up with gas over the weekend, and realized this FD would be a b!tch to daily beat...Filling gas (93)...premixing...filling WI res...filling IC sprayer. I guess I should be glad I don't have to fill the oil or coolant too :shrug:
|
Originally Posted by dubulup
^LOL I was filling up with gas over the weekend, and realized this FD would be a b!tch to daily beat...Filling gas (93)...premixing...filling WI res...filling IC sprayer. I guess I should be glad I don't have to fill the oil or coolant too :shrug:
|
water injection is nice for the immediate result--reducing detonation.
but i like it because it keeps the combustion chambers clean for the LONG-TERM....carbon buildup = hot spots = boom. |
I laugh really hard when I read quotes like that from Mr. Bell. I'll be more than happy to compare a good water injection system to the best intercooler he has to offer. The results will show the water injection based car will be able to run more boost, more timing, make more power have lower EGT's a steam cleaned engine and ambient or very close to ambient intake temps.
I have nothing against intercoolers but when a vendor bashes a product that threatens his own, its pretty obvious why. To say that water injection is a band-aid, you would have to say that an intercooler is also. In a perfect world you can say you dont need water injection, fine. But I can say two things for sure: 1) you are far more likely to detonate without water injection than with. 2) take a car and tune it with an intercooler get the max power you can out of it. Put a propery designed water injection kit on that car and you will make more power. I cant count the number of emails from people that were pinging prior to having water injection with the after market intercooler and now can run 4-5 more lbs of boost and make alot more power with our system on it. |
From reading through this thread, there are alot of other mis-conceptions. Alot of you think that a car cannot gain power from water injection without tuning and that is not true. We have seen time and time again that cars bolt our system on (and frankly our competitors kits also) and gain HP. It depends on the car. For example we found dodge SRT's are gaining atleast 18 HP to the wheels keeping the boost at the same level as without it. The SRT has a ECU that will advance the timing when there is no heatsoak. Or rather, it retards the timing when there is heatsoak. Because of this, they reclaim HP that would be lost otherwise. A car like the FD may not gain much HP from bolting it on because the computer in the car isn't going to automatically advance the timing to any great degree (the SRT's mentioned above were auto-advanceing more than 12-15 degrees). But in our tests at the drag strip we found that heatsoak is eliminated. Our trap speed remained constant throughout all the runs. Without the water injection it consistently drops throughout the day.
Also, powerloss with water injection typically means that too much water is injected or too much water at too low of a boost. |
Originally Posted by coolingmist
From reading through this thread, there are alot of other mis-conceptions. Alot of you think that a car cannot gain power from water injection without tuning and that is not true. We have seen time and time again that cars bolt our system on (and frankly our competitors kits also) and gain HP. It depends on the car. For example we found dodge SRT's are gaining atleast 18 HP to the wheels keeping the boost at the same level as without it. The SRT has a ECU that will advance the timing when there is no heatsoak. Or rather, it retards the timing when there is heatsoak. Because of this, they reclaim HP that would be lost otherwise. A car like the FD may not gain much HP from bolting it on because the computer in the car isn't going to automatically advance the timing to any great degree (the SRT's mentioned above were auto-advanceing more than 12-15 degrees). But in our tests at the drag strip we found that heatsoak is eliminated. Our trap speed remained constant throughout all the runs. Without the water injection it consistently drops throughout the day.
Again, if you want to talk about "misconceptions", you can start with the myth that WI lowers intake temps. It lowers the combustion chamber temps, not intake temps. If it lowered the intake temps, you would see horsepower gains just by installing WI, because the charge would be more dense (which is why installing an upgraded IC increases power to a small extent without any other mods). Your intake temp sensor is actually measuring the evaporation of water on the surface of the sensor due to the combination of the sensor body being heated by its surrounding area and the airflow over it. I'm not saying that WI is a "band-aid" or is a waste of money (I think it has its merits), only pointing out some "misconceptions" here. |
Originally Posted by coolingmist
...you are far more likely to detonate without water injection than with.
Again, not taking any sides here, but there is a big difference between an IC and WI: the WI system has many components that-- if they fail (and yes, I know, the chances are slim...but it is there, even with the various "safeguards")-- could result in catastrophic engine failure if the engine is tuned aggressively. The IC has no moving parts, and-- all aspects being equal with no changes-- will increase power just by its installation. |
BY the way, full alky cars, no gasoline, run no intercooler at all just big injectors. something to think about, as if we didnt have enough now, this stuff goes on forever, but thats what hot rodding is about, got to love it! RON
|
Originally Posted by ronbros3
BY the way, full alky cars, no gasoline, run no intercooler at all just big injectors. something to think about, as if we didnt have enough now, this stuff goes on forever, but thats what hot rodding is about, got to love it! RON
|
Another point, what is a properly designed setup? He is most likely talking about racing setups.
I bet that when running over 16PSI boost, his proper setup IS USING very high octane racing fuel. In that case he is correct. But how many of us can afford to run that all the time or even can get it. What context was it ment to be interperted in? |
Originally Posted by Kento
You're comparing apples to oranges; the SRT is "tuning" itself to adjust for the lack of heat.
If you install WI on a car that cannot adjust its timing and fuel delivery very much (and was running fine before WI), you will gain very little (if any) power. Again, if you want to talk about "misconceptions", you can start with the myth that WI lowers intake temps. It lowers the combustion chamber temps, not intake temps. If it lowered the intake temps, you would see horsepower gains just by installing WI, because the charge would be more dense (which is why installing an upgraded IC increases power to a small extent without any other mods). Your intake temp sensor is actually measuring the evaporation of water on the surface of the sensor due to the combination of the sensor body being heated by its surrounding area and the airflow over it. I'm not saying that WI is a "band-aid" or is a waste of money (I think it has its merits), only pointing out some "misconceptions" here. |
Originally Posted by Kento
You mean "with" WI, not without.
Again, not taking any sides here, but there is a big difference between an IC and WI: the WI system has many components that-- if they fail (and yes, I know, the chances are slim...but it is there, even with the various "safeguards")-- could result in catastrophic engine failure if the engine is tuned aggressively. The IC has no moving parts, and-- all aspects being equal with no changes-- will increase power just by its installation. Nowhere did I say that water injection is as reliable as an intercooler. its not. Im aware that an intercooler increases HP in a car, thats not indispute. Take that same car with the intercooler and most likely you will be able to run more boost, timing and make alot more power if you put water injection on it. Im not making this a WI vs Intercooler debate. I believe if your car came with an intercooler from the factory you should not remove it, because as pointed out its reliable. I believe you should run water injection with it. |
Originally Posted by coolingmist
I think if you read my post you will see I said that (eg, the rx7)
Originally Posted by coolingmist
Everyone knows that water injection lowers the combustion temps, thats the point.
Originally Posted by coolingmist
If you want to dis-agree that it lowers intake temps feel free. I can tell you that the stock and aftermarket sensors not only are significantly lower with WI, if you stop spraying the water they stay lower for quite a while before heating back up again.
|
Kento:
It's been proven countless times (on 2 of my own cars no less) that water injection dramatically lowers intake temps...to the tune of up to 100 degrees. Now, in both of those situations, I had a roots blower with no I/C. For a lot of roots-based systems, WI is the only practical solution because the blower exit is often only inches away from the intake valve. If your assertion is that WI is less effective on a system with proper intercooling? Sonny |
Originally Posted by Sonny
Kento:
It's been proven countless times (on 2 of my own cars no less) that water injection dramatically lowers intake temps...to the tune of up to 100 degrees. Now, in both of those situations, I had a roots blower with no I/C. For a lot of roots-based systems, WI is the only practical solution because the blower exit is often only inches away from the intake valve. If your assertion is that WI is less effective on a system with proper intercooling? Sonny As stated before, I believe that WI has plenty of merits, including applications like the Roots-type blower you speak of (although many OEMs use a liquid-cooled IC in those applications, due to the aforementioned reliability reasons). |
Originally Posted by Kento
Yes, and that's what we're talking about here on this forum, not Dodge SRTs.
What point? You never mentioned combustion chamber temps in any of your posts here in this thread. All you mentioned were intake temps. There is a big difference. If you read my post again about the sensor reacting to water evaporating on its surface, you'll understand why the "stock and aftermarket sensors stay lower for quite a while before heating back up"-- residual water droplets don't immediately evaporate in the intake tract, and that's why WI does not cool the intake charge. You are entitled to your opinion. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands