I have a D1sc with the 3 core intercooler, i think the previous owner of the charger had a water injection setup being is that there is a hole drilled in the intake pipe going into the manafold, would i be doing myself a favor to buy a setup to "protect" the engine and run 12lb's on my motor ? what are the pro's and cons of owning a system is what im asking....

Thanks guys.

 

pro's - helps a lot against detonation, and that allows you to run more timing

con's - ???

do a search, rooster433 has a home made setup on his car, seems to work good, and bottlefed (i think thats the guy anyways) is in the process of making his setup, but you can also buy the sets from companies such as SMC.... check out www.ls1motorsports.com and see how it allowed/helped them to run a rather large turbo at 14.5lbs of boost on a stock LS1 (and made 749 RWHP)

 

about the only con i can think of is if you dont pay attention to it, it will eventually get low, and run out of water...

also, a poorly made system can leak water into the motor, and cause hydra lock on startup.....


other then that... i dont think there are any.....

 

Check out some of my prior posts:

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hreadid=157197

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...threadid=36789

 

Works great! I have an SMC kit on the TTA. I can only run 16psi on straight 93 octane before I start getting a hint of knock retard. I can run 23psi on the same 93 octane with the alky injection with 0.0 KR.

I run 100% denatured alcohol. But you would have to experiment as to what runs the best. Water, in any percentage, wouldn't allow me to run the boost I can run. And it didn't suppress the knock very much.

And sneak up on the boost when tuning. Just a little bit of boost/timing at a time. Always log your runs so you know exactly what is going on at all times. And play with turn on points.

www.alkycontrol.com is also a real good one. Its progressive so you won't get a part throttle bog from all the alky spraying.

 

if 100% alcohol is needed to avoid knock, you might want to take a good hard look at your AF ratio....

you should be able to run almost straight water...... there are guys with GNs that i was talking to running very close to 20psi and they were using straight water..

 

I run 100% denatured alcohol.

According to Greg Carroll, solutions stronger than 40 percent alcohol may cause detonation.


Water, in any percentage, wouldn't allow me to run the boost I can run. And it didn't suppress the knock very much.

Now we have Mr. Carroll, an expert in water injection systems say one thing and another who uses it saying another. Please elaborate.

Willie

 

i ran many differant mixtures of water/alki and thanking the alki was helping seemed that it ran better if i just put water and ice and injected that.

 

Rob, If you're running it and you need to run alcohol to prevent detonation your engine wants more fuel. I'd suggest that you start adding fuel till you can run straight water and at that point you should be able to add boost and water proportionately as long as you've got enough fuel for the additional airflow (supposedly till your water delivery reaches somewhere in the 1-1.5:1 ratio with your fuel delivery, but I don't know of anyone that has gone nearly that far in recent history… that would also require that your water injection stayed proportionate to your fuel delivery)

 

Water doesn't burn in combustion. It cools only. Alcohol cools and does burn. Many, upon many, run straight denatured. Its added octane also.

My car just didn't like any water. Its just that simple. Every car is different. I tried because I also read that using too much alcohol would bring on knock. Completely opposite for my can and many others.

I don't know of one turbo Buick running straight water. 30% is usually the highest I've heard of.

We are talking 93 octane here. There is not enough in there to eliminate the knock when cylinder temps get that high. It doesn't matter how much fuel you throw in there, it will knock.

I run the amount of boost I'm running with 0.0 KR on the entire run. O2's are in the 750-770 range, which it just about perfect for turbo buicks. Not too shabby for the stock intercooler and smallish turbo

 

Not quite. It doesn't need fuel, it needs octane. I could be running pig rich and it'll knock at those boost levels. Even with a 200 combustion chamber cooling. More fuel isn't the answer. More octane is and denatured is more octane with cooling.

I could run the exact same times with race gas and no alky. No more fuel and it won't show knock. So its not a fuel related issue. Its an ability to suppress knock.

 

Yes, water doesn't burn during combustion, and it cools at a little better then 2x the rate that alcohol does when it evaporates. But water/alcohol injection is not about cooling but about detonation control. Water in the combustion chamber prevents detonation at a much greater rate then just adding fuel, and to a much higher limit (normally you can only add fuel till somewhere in the 11:1 range before it actually makes the mixture more detonation prone). For the greatest effect you want to add the water as close to the cylinder as possible, so as little as possible evaporates before getting into the chamber.

By adding alcohol you're just adding a relatively high octane fuel. If your engine is getting sufficient fuel through the injectors there is no reason to add alcohol through the auxiliary system (well, besides that it will keep the water from freezing in cold temps and high altitudes without any excessive negative effects) since in most cases it's easier to add fuel in the form of gas and you'll get better detonation resistance with water.

Yes, but that is not because of something special about your engine that makes it work differently, it's because you're running it lean and the alcohol is compensating for it. I'd bet that if you put a wideband on it and tried it without the injection (I'd suggest on race gas to prevent blowing anything up) you'd find that you could add fuel at about half the rate that you're adding alcohol (takes almost 2x the alcohol to mix with the same amount of air) before you get it to a reasonable a/f ratio. I bet that if you ran the wideband with the alcohol injection on it you'd go of the graph at the point it turns on (get a rich spike) and then it would lean out as you go up in rpms

 

Mark, all I know is it works without water. Maybe you should go to www.turbobuick.com or www.t6p.com and check out the alky injection boards. You'd see that nobody runs straight water because it just doesn't work. And 90% run straight denatured or straight methanol.

Maybe water works in low boost blower apps? But it doesn't seem to work in higher boost apps with turbos.

I'm not running out of fuel as the duty cycles are in the low-mid 70's. Plenty left. Trust me, I've had this setup for over 2 years and have tried all kinds of different ways. This is the best way it runs in my car, period. As for being lean, nope. If I lean it just 10mv, I'll get knock. I'm right where I should be to get max power.

All I can tell is to check out those two sites and read what everybody runs and says. Even the people that build the alky kits usually recommend running straight denatured at first and then start varying the combo to see if you get better results. More often than not though, you end up running no water.

 

doesn't that prove 83crossfire right?... i mean if you get knock by leaning it out a tiny bit, then your running pretty lean already... right?

 

No. My air/fuel ratio is such that it is optimal where it is at to make the most power. Just on the verge of being lean but not lean.

Rob

 

Is that with or without the extra alcohol?

Second, what most people don't know is that you can control detonation with a lean mixture just like with a rich one, but it's much more difficult to do and keep things happy (ie, not lunch something).

Not that I place much stock in normal O2 readings, but the 700mV range is REALLY LEAN for most cars. I know that the turbobuick guys go a little leaner then most, but I was under the impression that they still shot for mid 800's (I used to get a lot of crap from the 4th gen guys when I found that my WS6 ran fastest right around 890, as opposed to the accepted low to mid 900's).

Do you have any way of tinkering with this? I'd bet that there's some power to be found here (assuming that you don't sell it first)

 

Is that with or without the extra alcohol?

Both

Second, what most people don't know is that you can control detonation with a lean mixture just like with a rich one, but it's much more difficult to do and keep things happy (ie, not lunch something).

Not that I place much stock in normal O2 readings, but the 700mV range is REALLY LEAN for most cars. I know that the turbobuick guys go a little leaner then most, but I was under the impression that they still shot for mid 800's (I used to get a lot of crap from the 4th gen guys when I found that my WS6 ran fastest right around 890, as opposed to the accepted low to mid 900's).

Scan tools read different for turbo Buicks. Its about 100mv less than other non Buick scanners. I use Direct Scan but Turbo Link reads the same. I think the OTC scanners might read the higher O2 numbers. FWIW, my WS6 ran the best at 870.

Do you have any way of tinkering with this? I'd bet that there's some power to be found here (assuming that you don't sell it first)

Tinkering with what? O2? Its right where it should be, trust me. Ask any turbo Buick were the most power is and they'll say mid 700's on the scanner.

 

Rob, they cant see the forest through the trees.

And actually, you havent played with really saturating the air. Water is a waste of space inside the motor. proven by many at the track, on scan tools, butt dyno's, etc.

Too much propaganda and i've yet to see a "fast" car on water. Alcohol..different story.

Straight methanol for me. Making a car rich loses power. Leaning the motor out makes power. leaning the motor out and not have it detonate makes the most power. So if you pull out inj PW in your PE tables and replace some of the fueling with AI, you will be able to run the car lean, suppress detonation, and make the most power.

On my site there is a 383 Vette I did, runs 20 PSI boost on 93 octane gas, Brodix heads,.700 roller, D1 from ATI, 83lb inj, FAST, yada yada yada. No water in his tank.

Until you have a system spraying, and have tried both water and methanol, mixed or in parts there off, and monitored knock retard while making HP... then you will see the difference. Until then there is only speculation for the non-believers. Its that easy.. really.



not rocket science.. Just gotta believe.. it works..

 

Cute…

yep, I guess I'm blind to the light…

I guess all the MIT studies and research is just a load of crap. Ricardo didn't know what he was talking about either… for that matter just about every serious book on IC engines is confused, huh?

Define "really fast." FWIW, you won't usually see anything that a lot of people call a really fast car with EITHER since most classes don't allow anything "extra" injected into the engine under the rules, and it's just plain rare to see really serious cars built that don't "fit in" somewhere. Water injection is too easily used to add all sorts of other stuff during a race for officials to keep track of. For that matter if you're going to build a serious race car, just cut back on the compression/run race gas and don't worry about it.

You're not suppressing detonation, you're adding a higher octane fuel to the mixture. Why not just run 116 and skip the second system to deliver the alky altogether? The car will be lighter, less to go wrong and you'll have the same total effect.

yep, get a proper a/f mixture, inject it at the right place and straight water works. Assuming that you're detonation limited. If you don't need any more detonation control then adding water won't do squat to the thing. Go lean on the fuel, keep adding air… at that point anything that the engine could use as fuel will make it go faster, that's what you're doing. Run out of alky and your engine will start trying to use itself as fuel.

 

fudge it, race car = race gas.... and if its too expensive go get a honda

 

Ok hows this, since all the rocket scientists and theorists claim that this is hog wash..

Go figure. I own a knock guage.. on straight 93 octane fuel with a 20 degree total timing chip the most my car can run boost wise is 16-17 PSI with an AFR of 11.5:1. Adding fuel and dropping the AFR down to 10:1 will allow an extra lb without setting off the knock sensor. Thos the car doesnt make any more MPH. Add water into the mix... wow.. I can now run 20 PSI at the same timing level and not set off the knock detector. Lets get this a little more fun, mix alcohol with water, i'm able to squeeze an extra 3-4 PSI. So on a 50/50 mix I can now run 24-25 PSI boost without setting off the knock sensor. get rid of the water and run straight denatured... car now responds well up to 28 PSI boost and no knock.. replace the denatured with methanol, i'm blowing past 30 PSI on the same timing without knock retard.

This weekend with a V6 motor I ran in a 3800 lb car 120.78 for trap speed on straight 93 Amoco + alcohol. 97.22 in the 1/8. with a stock bottom end, small turbo, and a bone stock factory IC in 95 degree weather, 90 percent humidity.

Could I have of achieved this performance on 93 by itself.. not unless the car was dropped from a plane, could it of done this performance with just water, not in a million lifetimes.

As a matter of fact, due to the "bone stock IC" on my vehicle, alcohol affords me to run faster than race gas due to the charge air temp reductions.

Say what you want, read all your books, and listen to who you want to listen too. Free country and as I stated previously,

Unless you have a system and have tried both water and alcohol... you have nothing but an angry keyboard

:lala:

 

Ok, i'll let the rocket scientist explain this one.

Using a knock detector, my own car can run approx 16-17 PSI boost without lighting up the knock detector using a 20 degree timing program at WOT.

If I mist(spray) water into the motor, I am able to raise FP and raise boost to 20 PSI before I see any knock. Adding alcohol to the water 50/50 i'm able to raise FP and raise boost to 24-25 PSI without seeing knock on the scantool. get rid of the water and run straight denatured alcohol, i'm able to run 28 PSI by raising FP without knock. Replace the denatured with methanol, i'm now able to blow past 30 PSI without seeing knock. Same timing, same fueling program as was being used when the car was at 16 PSI.

This past weekend, at a 93 octane event we had here in Bradenton, Florida, with a full tank of 93 Amoco, my 3800 lb V6 car ran 120.78 mph in the 1/4 and 97.22 in the 1/8. Do your math accordingly. 231 cubic inch motor with a completely bone stock factory GM intercooler, stock bottom end, no nitrous.

Can this performance be achieved on water injection. Not in a million years of adjusting FP and timing.

Believe what you want, believe what you may read, its like propaganda. "If you have a system and tried both, then you may have a clue", until then, your just another angry keyboard.

Street car with high boost and alky= race car :lala:

Whats race gas.. thats the stuff that costs 7 bucks a gallon and clogs O2 sensors.. been there and done that. Wont ever go back to it with my street car.

 

hog wash isn't the term that I'd use, but…

Huh, you know, I do know a couple of rocket scientists but I'd bet that none of them could give a real answer with an IC engine. Both my dad and my father in law were engineers designing rocket engines (my dad on Saturn boosters and the LEM my father-in-law other boosters and tomahawk missles…), would aerospace engineers be close enough? Yea, I didn't think so.

As far as your actual point… you're running lean. You add fuel you go faster. You add high octane fuel you can run more boost also. You run more boost you need more fuel (methanol is a better fuel then rubbing alcohol).

Add the needed fuel as pump gas and then add an appropriate amount of water through the water injection and you'll be able to run even more boost and go even faster (cheaper also). Simple as that.

 

Won't happen Mark. Its been proven over and over again that the turbo Buicks don't respond to water.

 

heh, if Clint ever fixes the tranny in his TTA I'll prove you wrong but even when I do no one will believe it anyway because it's not what everyone else did...

 

Add the needed fuel as pump gas and then add an appropriate amount of water through the water injection and you'll be able to run even more boost and go even faster (cheaper also). Simple as that.



I bet you a 500 bucks it wont happen. Come with cash.. I 'm ready.. cash in hand.

You dont know what your talking about. Close but no cigar. Your talking knock suppression, yes it does that, you up the flow, you get steam out the tail pipes.. while its steaming.. you aint making power. You bring the water down, all you left with is 93 octane gas with some added knock suppression.

Running AI, you have a fuel that cools the charge tremendously, and drops detonation. As far as AI cuasing knock..

Say what you will, 1000's of cars running AI, and getting results.

Put the money up or

 

Heres someone else that runs alky,


http://www.derekdevises.com/

Pretty informative reading.. and methanol doesnt make any power.. :lala:

 

Great… go to the track with someone who has a clue how to tune the thing and try it. You can paypal me the money when you're done.

 

Here ya have have a bunch of guys having the ability to run either, have experimented with both, say that one makes more power. Documented with ET slips and track performance, on cars that are making numbers unheard of using straight 93 in the same applications.

Also pointed a website to someone else making power non-turbo buick, to confirm what were saying.

83 Crossfire TA, your intentions may be well, but your lack of knowledge in the area of using such systems is evident. And this is due to absorbing too much propaganda on the net.

Just admit it, your wrong. Its ok.. dont need to coward on the issue. I blew a hole in all your beliefs/theories/assumptions.. Your on the fringe of being considered a Ford guy.

Better yet, since you know so much, why dont you list your injection system components and ET slips to back up your claims of superiority. See I can open myself up.. pretty easy.

Heres a timeslip from last nite

1.847
4.945
7.522
93.88
9.722
11.602
118.17

on a 3800 lb car with a 231 CI motor running straight 93 octane on drag radials. car# 185 at Bradenton Motorsport Park in Fla 3/11/04

Follow your claims with time slips, the world will follow. :hail:

 

bwahahahahaha


you donno how very close you are....


btw, i will do alkey to water tests once my FORD eaton blower is on the motor..... you know the motor powering the car thru my FORD 9" rear.

 

I will probably try the water, water/alky, and just alky thing when my car is completed just to see if it makes it faster even with race gas.

 

You shut up MrDude_1, did I ask you to get involved?

I don't own a ford, but I do work on one occasionally:

 

BTW, it is faster then your car and it's got 4 doors (I think that I should get bonus points for that ).

Hopefully what I started welding up in my garage last night will put that one to shame (yea, for those that saw pics of the previous setup, someone offered me an insane amount of money for the manifolds/crossover and since I had them off the car to go through emissions I sold them)

You've been here for 11 posts and you've managed to prove yourself a complete pig headed moron. For that I will reward you with the great honor of joining my ignore list… goodbye.

You know what they say, ignorance is bliss… have a happy life.

 

Man I know how to call 'em.. hehe

Cheers.

:lala:

 

Yeah... but that little 4 doors runnning low 11's @ 119. BW

 

I bet it doesnt weigh 3800 lbs , 100% stock bottom end, and is doing it will a full tank of 93 on 6 cylinders. full exhuast, car full of tools, and LOOKING good while doing it

I went 120.7 in 95 degree weather last weekend.. not last year, or ??

Plus its a Ford , but I know.. I dont know jack :lala: .. guess I gotta keep beating on my stocker for a couple hundred more passes than the 600 it has on it already.. to get things rite.

GM rules over all others :hail: :hail: :hail:

 

And you've been here for 1500+ posts and prove over and over again what a pig headed moron you seem to be acting as though only you know how things work, with what seems like no real world experience in the matter, and refusing to even consider an alternative way of thinking - even when real world proof is given to you.

Now me and Julio may not see eye to eye on some topics, including a TTA's ability on pumpgas(I went 11.46@117.81 on straight pumpgas, no additives or injection but thats another story ), but his knowledge with alchahol/water injection systems and controllers is top notch and is based on what really works in the real world, not just theories.And he proves his knowledge over and over again in a helpfull mannor on various turbo buick message boards.

Before you start calling someone with real world facts on a subject a pig headed moron you might want to look at yourself and realise that maybe you dont know everything there is to know about everything and keep an open mind

Steve

 

1- with respect to water/alcohol, we ran a complete, regulated and datalogged setup triggered off one of the extra programmable channels on the Haltech with a series of injectors so it could be precisely metered. I know exactly what it did with different water/alcohol ratios…
2- I'd love to learn something new. Teach me something. Alternative ways of thinking are great, when they work. So far you've managed to call me names over something that I've tested and data logged both ways and proven beyond any doubt what his happening (at least to anyone that saw it). It matched what the published research showed to the letter. I have pretty much summarized what I saw. I'm sorry if the truth doesn't agree with what you want the truth to be. I'm also sorry that I can't (and don't care to) relate every experience I ever had so you can evaluate the veracity of my statements. To be honest, I put a lot more weight in well published, well documented studies so you can tell exactly what was done and what mistakes may have been made over what some jackass (even me) tried that may have assorted errors/problems with the procedure without complete documentation of what was done so I or you could examine it first hand. If you want to see a well documented account of what water and assorted fuels added to the mixture have on the combustion process I suggest that you read Ricardo and Taylor, since there results match what you will get in a well controlled real world test. I will not take the time and have nowhere near the level of documentation that either text has on what I did.
3- Nutshell of what you will see, assuming your mixture is correct to start with: Add more fuel (alcohol) you can run more cylinder pressure before the engine becomes detonation limited. Add water, same deal. Add more fuel, engine actually becomes more detonation sensitive. Add even more water, engine becomes less detonation sensitive and BSFC drops, so you can gain power by leaning the base fuel map, and if you care to you can continue this to many times where fuel stopped working.

Obviously not.

I've tried assorted turbo buick boards for tech (even trying to find real tech on this specific topic). I have yet to find much that doesn't amount to "product reviews" and haggling over BS. If that's what I was looking for I'd read one of the assorted car rags… Maybe "Turbo" would be fitting.

There are a few turbo buick guys out there that do have a clue and do try different stuff, but as far as I can tell with the exception of the very rare published and web published article they are almost entirely ignored.

I don't know nearly everything. But I am clearly seeing someone that has tried one thing and found that "wow, that did something" and ran with it, pretty much ignoring any real experimenting and learning. Just because you saw something and made up some explanation for what you saw does not mean that your explanation is reality. What you saw was reality but your explanation is just a hypothesis on what was happening. I have done just what I have suggested and I know what the results were. I base my response on the results trying to ignore what I think the cause was. I have no real desire to defend what I saw, that's over and done with. You can believe it or not. You can learn something or not. I don't care. I do intend to further test this with a different setup, but I'm more interested on rates vs VE, and that is on hold for now since it will require a completely custom intake manifold design to get an accurate evaluation of what is happening.

To that eventual end, the rest of the parts I need to build a tig welder came today, and that's what I intend to experiment with tonight.

 

Originally posted by Julio

I bet it doesnt weigh 3800 lbs ,

< Weighs about the same as any Fox chassis.

100% stock bottom end,

< Try again.. stock 5.0L short block.

and is doing it will a full tank of 93 on 6 cylinders.

< on 93, but I'll give you the 2 extra cylinders..

full exhuast,

< Yup.

car full of tools,

< I HIGHLY doubt you run the track with tools in your trunk.

and LOOKING good while doing it

< Just your opinion... which seems to be loosing weight post by post.

I went 120.7 in 95 degree weather last weekend.. not last year, or ??

< Relevence? I didn't know timeslips expired..

Plus its a Ford

< One thats faster than your regal.

, but I know.. I dont know jack :lala: .. guess I gotta keep beating on my stocker for a couple hundred more passes than the 600 it has on it already.. to get things rite.


< Haha... you said it dude..

GM rules over all others :hail: :hail: :hail:

< Hmmm.. again, just your opinion. I have yet to see any hard data to back up your claims, other your now week old timeslip.



Well back to the garage, fiddling with my stock short block 5.0L...

BW

 

Guys,
Julio knows what he is doing as well as countless others about alcohol injection. Many have tried various mixes and such with very little success. He runs methonal and I run denatured. I've been as fast as 121.4mph with my setup, different chip though.

Until you've actually tried doing what we've done, then you just have opinions and hearsay. It works in the real world. In a controlled lab setting, maybe it wouldn't. Who knows? But real life testing, this is what has shown to work above what others think should work.

And Julio's car is a Trans Am, not a Regal

 

I didn't read everything

Has anyone thought.. hey sure water can pull more heat out of the air but the heat transferr to alcohol is much faster than water.

It takes more alcohol to do the same cooling..

but it takes water longer to do the same cooling. prehaps too much time for the water to be useful?

 

Alcohol also has a lower flash point than water. So when using water typically the nozzles are way smaller to assure complete atomiztion, becuase if you shot water through an NOS nozzle for example, it would puddle, unless you hit it with 200 degrees. alcohol as long as the air is above 50 degrees.. it flashes and is gone. I compare it to brake cleaner, whereby you spray it.. poof its gone.

Steve and Rob, thanks for the support. I was thinking for a while I was on corral.net, stang.net, skirt.net, one of those with all this hoopla over Turds being supperior on a GM BOARD. I think anyone thats educated and reads through this post will see the and read rite through it.

All the documented studies and such have no basis other than someone without a system spewing garbage. I dont see we used XYZ pump, xyz nozzles, xyz controller, here are pictures of the car, here is the test date, here are performance numbers on straight water, here are performance numbers on "mix", here are performance numbers on alcohol. Nothing just a bunch of and used a haltech with series of injectors man this guys water injection system must be something out of this world. Hell that blows away even the 1500 dollar aquamist system. **** if I had a system like that.. you bet it would be the best in the world. Who uses injectors on water injection. last I checked, the consensus was nozzles. Stainless ones run under high pressure to assure atomization. Thinking that an injector unless made out of stainless steel would corrode like a piece of metal left in saltwater. But then having the best system in the world, stainless they were. And run under 70 PSI to make sure they didnt lock up. but.. So back to the BS, go to Aquamist.. the world leader on water injection.. they use nozzles not injectors. And small ones.

Wait.. the test was performed on a briggs straton lawnmower engine fitted with a haltech, it actually allowed the lawnmower to cut more grass adding water to the gas. yessir boys.. three weeks and we injected the lawnmower.. you bet it can cut. Or maybe a 1.2 liter Fiat motor.

I guess these guys dont know anything about THDP for TTA.

Funny thing we start talking water/alcohol injection, I call this guy a Turd guy, he then out of being foolish produces the picture of a 4 letter motor on a GM board. He's got nuts to do this. I would ban him for being stupid. I also notice the array of nozzles readily visible on his motor to really prove beyond a reasonable doubt he knows what he's talking about. Lets see that kick azzz water injection system on your 6lb blower. What a crock.

I'd be impressed if he said.. look at my PT88 turbo, 351, .700 roller, and here's my system. And proved he did what he claimed. But all he does is claim "IF" I get my buddies car working.. i'll show you

Saturn5, I like your jabs.. but they hold no punch. 3800 lbs for a Fox chassis.. more like 3200 loaded. Irreguardless, "IF" I met up with you/him on the street, he would get spanked so bad, it would make his head spin. But it doesnt matter, cuase its bench racing for something that will never happen. Dont bring your butter knife to a gun fight.

Where's an "owned" flag , cuase ya guys are so far on left field..you'll never catch any *****. My proof, is my car, my customer base, and my expertise in making a small displacement motor hang with much larger motors on limited octane. Your proof.. is your keyboard.. nothing more..

 

383, .700 roller, Brodix heads, Lunati crank, ATI D1 blower, 83 lb injectors, FAST, 20 PSI boost on 93 with alcohol.

This one didnt make more power on water either.. go figure.

:lala:

 

That pic reminds me I need to find my turkey cooker. 83 Crossfire TA knows some ****t, no joke and no theory and he IS respectfull even of those who know way less. I understand why he jumped on the lean conclusion. Alky works for knock suppresion and water cleans carbon out of the chamber IMHO. I personally feel water does NOT do the job alky does in knock supression because its not in the intake track long enough to flash. On turbo you get the added benefit of fuel to drive the turbo from ALKY you dont on water, supercharger no diff. Having said that lets fog some propane in there and go like hell on 93octane without a pump.

 

Turkey Cooker.. :hail: hey I didnt make it.. I just work on it .. I too can understand the lean conclusion.. but it doesnt work that way. Its a theory vs practical. Like those turbinator things that go in the intake tract, or some cold air induction, electric SC's, oil additives, etc.. that in thoery work better, but really make zero gain. At least i'm putting up pixs that are different

Ive been working on a progressive propane controller.. but its still far out in the distance. And cars on propane, the only ones i've heard making any power are on the Viper forums and using it with NOS. As to the Buick crowd on propane.. nobody yet to establish any meaningful numbers. Its just hard to regulate the "hit" when it fires, bottle warmers, and lots of fiddling.

BTW.. you should listen to that motor idle at 1100 rpms and when it goes WOT.. Serious screeeeching

 

Propane is still underdeveloped for our use as a suppression and enhancer. I'm hoping it will be a feasable in the near future. Yeah how bout them Nitroused/Propaned Vipers! Good work Viper guys.

 

Funny you said that as I belive there is someone(or a company)making propane injection kits for the turbobuick applications. I dont know much about it as I have never played with any type of auxillary injection. Maybe Julio can chime in on that if he's had any experience with it.

As for 83 Crossfire TA, he may know about theories and lab results(you know like a book smart mechanic who knows how a sensor works but couldnt turn a wrench if his life depends on it)but we're not looking for or trying to talk about lab results. To prove what he says he'd need to do more than run a lab test, rather get a car out there and give us some data from what was done and how the car responded. I'm not taking sides here because I dont like 83 Crossfire TA but rather because I've seen the results that Julio speaks of first hand.

That is the type of data you will get from Julio, and I'm sure he's documented everything he's done from what works to what doesnt work, in a real world you can use this information here's how I did it fasion.

For the turbobuick guys that read this, I think it's a moot point to argue what works. It's obvious the reason the turbobuick comminity has come so far with what we've got is the open minded people who bought these cars to start with and still do. People like Jason Cramer(girdle and power plate), Steve Y(MaxEffort), and Eric Marshall(Turbotweak) are some of the few open minded fellows that allowed us push these cars as far as we have using an amazing amount of production parts and electronics. Julio is just as important with his alchycontrol for pushing the limits on pumpgas - now if only I can get some info on his roller rocker setup

Let them stay closed minded and slow

Steve

 

OK, one last time. Injected into an engine, alcohol is a fuel, water is a detonation suppressant. To really take advantage of water injection you need to get it into the chamber atomized, not vaporized. If you add fuel until you go much richer then about 11 or 11.5:1, not only do you make less power but you INCREASE the likelihood of detonation.

I’m not sure what you mean.

FWIW, to clarify Saturn's post (I'm pretty sure it was in reference to the LTD), it's pretty much a stock bottom end with some cheap badger pistons (yea, I know, but the short block was built by someone else and it was cheap, we just freshened it with new bearings…). At the time it had a modified mustang h-pipe (the wheelbase is 8" longer then a mustang or an f-body for that matter), shorty headers, dynomax 2.25" super turbo mufflers and modified stock mustang tailpipes. It's since got larger super turbo mufflers and turn downs, but we don't have any times for that. That whole setup was pulled off, it has brand new long tubes and I'll be welding a setup with 3" race magnums for it in the next couple of weeks. Just those additions should make it significantly faster. The last time it was weighed it was at 3440lb + a 200# driver. It made these passes on 87 octane but is usually run at the track on the good stuff (92 octane) just to be safe. Other modifications done this winter were a more heavily modified blower inlet/"power pipe," a set of flywheight bogart rims (it lost almost 100# in wheels and tires alone) and assorted small tweaks. Hopefully soon it will see a new short block since the one in there hasn't had any cylinder wall crosshatch for probably 6 years now, and you can actually see the blowby coming out of the breather when it's running. It's fast for a complete piece of crap.

 

I could tell ya bout the rockers.. but then i'd have to kill ya .. if ya really wanna know, email me, i'll give YOU the specifics :wink:

The propane stuff is still far out there, even the alky has some ways to go still.. I feel like a Canadian waving the flag with it. Its alrite, a whole communitty cant be wrong.

Guy(spooledstang) just posted on TB.com.. he's running 75/25 on his new DIY AI kit and is estatic bout the results. I'll suggest he goes to 100% water cuase Ricardo said so.

My motor has top of the line cast pistons, cast crank, 2 bolt main and is missing 2 cylinders..

 

Why inject closest to the cylinder? I would think that it would be better to inject closest to the turbo outlet so that the water is in the air stream longer to absorb more heat. In doing that, more water could be injected.

I decided to give this water/alky setup a try. Picked up a 150PSI Shurflo, some Poly tubing, check valve, 2 mist nozzles from McMaster-Carr, and a gallon of denatured alky from the home supply junk store.

The plan is to try 40% denatured (50% eth, 50% meth), 60% water at 150PSI at 5-7 PSI of boost. I am working on some ECM progessive control of the pump but it isn't ready yet. The pump will be a constant on with about 400mL/min at 150PSI. Where is the "usual" best place to put the injectors/nozzles?

Also, I was playing with the gas to water/alky ratios to see what it would take to run 87 octane full time and have the denatured make up for the octane when in boost. It seems like I could run a bigger shot of alky/water and less gas via the ECM injector BPWs. With the ECM controlling the water pump this seems very possible. With my current injector BPW duty cycles, I will be injecting roughly 30% alky for the total fuel I need (alky AFR 9:1, meth AFR 6:1). I do a 1.8 multiplier for the denatured to make it approx. gas AFR. So that means I could pull out about 30% fuel at boost and the octane would be (.7*87 + .3*113) = 95 octane.