Rotary Car Performance General Rotary Car and Engine modification discussions.

Nitrious limits?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 28, 2003 | 03:06 AM
  #26  
I wish I was driving!
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,241
Likes: 84
From: BC, Canada
Originally posted by Turbo 3
Guess I'd like to hear your definition of "safer" as well for a wet system. The way I'm looking at this is that an EMS is running the motor and you have control over the fuel/ign parameters. When the NO2 hit happens, the MAP sensor "sees" the increase in flow, as well as the air temp and others, and correspondingly adds more fuel. I don't see how the wet will be any safer than a dry if tuned properly.
The problem is that the majority of dry systems simply run an FMU: They just up the fuel pressure to compensate for the nitrous. Obviously, EMS tuning is a better option, but it is hard to beat the simple reliability of wet systems (so long as you design the system to avoid fuel puddling, which is not all that hard on a rotary).
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2003 | 09:30 AM
  #27  
SPOautos's Avatar
Hey, where did my $$$ go?
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,413
Likes: 0
From: Bimingham, AL
Also, if your running a 3rd gen or a TII with an aftermarket ecu then you have a speed density car and the computer wont see the extra oxygen. The only extra fuel or timing changes you'd get is from the air temp sensor and thats not even close to enough fuel or retart. Even if it was enough the air temp sensors are so slow to react that it wouldnt make the changes in time.

This means if you were wanting to control it with the ecu then either you need an ecu designed to control nitrous (which not all of them do). If you have a ecu that does NOT control like the Power FC for a 3rd gen, piggyback, or upgraded ecu then you'd have to swap out the map before spraying to add the fuel.

Its all to much hassle, I'd rather run a wet kit that mixes in the right amount of fuel for the nitrous that its given. I'm not as concerned about the timing, I already run a real retarted timing.

BTW - a MAP sensor doesnt see an increase in flow, it only reads pressure. A nitrous system doesnt create positive manifold pressure. The MAF (mass air flow) meter on a TII is what would see an increase in flow but I dont know how well that would work for nitrous, and like mentioned before 3rd gens and TII with aftermarket ecu's dont have a MAF.

STEPHEN

Last edited by SPOautos; Dec 28, 2003 at 09:34 AM.
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2003 | 02:41 PM
  #28  
I wish I was driving!
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,241
Likes: 84
From: BC, Canada
I have never seen a system in which the nitrous is measured as airflow by the ECU; the fogger is almost always plumbed after the AFM.

Dry systems typically do not alter the injector duty cycles, they merely up the fuel pressure. Its one of the reasons they are limited in their maximum horsepower values. This is another reason why the typical dry kit is not so hot for turbos... at 15 psi of boost, the fuel pressure is already around 55 psi. Add a 75 horsepower shot trough it, and the fuel pressure will increaser an extra ~10 psi. The fuel pump is now working at 65 psi, which decreases fuel pump flow. A wet system does not increase fuel pressure, so fuel pump low is limited only by the maximum manifold pressure.
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2003 | 05:31 PM
  #29  
chairchild's Avatar
50mpg - oooooh yeah!
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
From: UK
Here's an idea.....

Placing a fogger nozzle in a PP arrangement in the housing. COMPLETELY seperate from the rest of the FI gubbins
Reply
Old Dec 28, 2003 | 06:42 PM
  #30  
I wish I was driving!
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,241
Likes: 84
From: BC, Canada
Originally posted by chairchild
Here's an idea.....

Placing a fogger nozzle in a PP arrangement in the housing. COMPLETELY seperate from the rest of the FI gubbins
Hmm? I am a little confused as to what you are suggesting?

ALL wet foggers are completely separate from the fuel injectors.

If you are thinking about putting the wet foggers in the rotor housings... bad idea. You want them at LEAST 6" from the entrance to the engine.

For a PP, you best bet would be to install one wet fogger in each runner just a little bit behind each carburator.
Reply
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 06:27 PM
  #31  
chairchild's Avatar
50mpg - oooooh yeah!
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
From: UK
I meant that it would never come into contact with any of the inlet tract (reducing the amount of airspace available for the fuel/air mixture)

So why place them 6" away from the housings?
Reply
Old Dec 31, 2003 | 11:57 AM
  #32  
Turbo 3's Avatar
Safety Guy
Tenured Member 10 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,433
Likes: 0
From: Apple Valley area in MN
Appreciate the explanation guys.
Reply
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 02:06 AM
  #33  
nillahcaz's Avatar
you are missed
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 987
Likes: 1
From: St. Louis
Originally posted by chairchild
I meant that it would never come into contact with any of the inlet tract (reducing the amount of airspace available for the fuel/air mixture)

So why place them 6" away from the housings?
for one burning hot rotor and liquid gas are not a good thing to mix
Reply
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 05:13 AM
  #34  
I wish I was driving!
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,241
Likes: 84
From: BC, Canada
Originally posted by chairchild
I meant that it would never come into contact with any of the inlet tract (reducing the amount of airspace available for the fuel/air mixture)

So why place them 6" away from the housings?
Needs some room to atomize. As a general rule, the longer the length, the more power you will make.
Reply
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 06:02 PM
  #35  
chairchild's Avatar
50mpg - oooooh yeah!
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
From: UK
But what about direct nitrous injection? You can can get stupid amounts of power from that, and that injects directly into the combustion chamber (on piston engines anyway)

What about injecting nearer the spark plugs?

I'm messing about with my engine, and I'm going to try and squeeze out as much power as possible from it, whilst retaining streetability
Reply
Old Jan 3, 2004 | 06:40 PM
  #36  
I wish I was driving!
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,241
Likes: 84
From: BC, Canada
Originally posted by chairchild
But what about direct nitrous injection? You can can get stupid amounts of power from that, and that injects directly into the combustion chamber (on piston engines anyway)

What about injecting nearer the spark plugs?

I'm messing about with my engine, and I'm going to try and squeeze out as much power as possible from it, whilst retaining streetability
I am familiar with direct injection as a form of fuel injection but not nitrous. Are you sure you are not just confusing this with direct port nitrous?

Direct port nitrous puts one fogger per intake runner; it does not put fogger IN the combustion chamber.

A non-direct port system will either (typically) use a spray bars mounted after the carburator or a single nitrous fogger mounted bore the throttle body. Direct port is several nitrous foggers mounted in each individual runner after the throttle body.

Last edited by scathcart; Jan 3, 2004 at 06:42 PM.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SakeBomb Garage
SakeBomb Garage
9
May 11, 2020 10:04 AM
Sethix
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
6
Nov 3, 2017 11:48 PM
SakeBomb Garage
Group Buy & Product Dev. FD RX-7
8
Oct 9, 2015 10:05 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33 AM.