Separate names with a comma.
Posted by 91-gsx, Nov 7, 2005
Bolt-on Tech - 4G63 intake, exhaust, intake manifold, ignition, fuel system, cooling, etc.
continue the conversation, this might get very interesting.
I'm still waiting for an electronic assist turbo to show up on the market. Boost as soon as you hit the throttle That'd sure get rid of lag.
If you were using alcohol I think you'd run into serious tuning issues very quickly.
How about that CryO2 intake insert that is on the market? If you ran two of those in sequence instead of an IC you might be able to swing it. You'd just need to carry a lot of CO2 in your ride (weight issues).
Or you could do it by running A/C lines through the intake and have a switch so the lines don't always run inside the car. I don't know if you'd get back the H/P loss from running the A/C though.
. the car was supposed to push i think close to 900hp, he used 2 intercoolers, the ac as an intercooler to. and all of this weighs a lot. i understand what you said about the alcohol being a tuning issue due to the fact you have it kick in too soon, but you can have smaller nozzles with their own boost switch that would, lets say kick in at 5psi, and the other big ones would help out at 10psi. that way you do not drown the engine. very interesting topic, and it would be very worth it if you had the right tuning.
Granted a V-8 is pushing out alot more exhaust gases to spool it, but only 4 cylinders push each turbo. Mustang owners have also discovered this and use twin turbo setups to produce more usable power.
I'm curious about a comparison with the DSM's... Anyone ever supercharged a 4G63 and dynoed it?
what do you guys think about this setup that i just described? ups or downs to it?
would definetly be new.
and since we are going all out with ideas, what about having fins on the actual piping? dunno if it would help
What I'm thinking would be more effective with this setup is a small supercharger set up before the turbo in the intake setup. Something that would make small boost (5 psi) at very low RPMs (1500,) long before any decent sized turbo will spool up. Theoretically it would actually make a big turbo spool at lower RPMs due to the increased airflow from the charger.
Edit: The only problem I see is you would need to run a small I/C for the charger so the air wasn't so hot when it hit the turbo compressor that your overall air map would suffer.
ReEdit: I'm picturing a very messy line of pipes to do this. Maybe an output line from the charger to a very small SMIC, back to the turbo inlet, out to a FMIC and back to the T/B. It would probably be a huge mess actually... You'd definately want to run a GMMAF so it read the airflow at the right time...
ReReEdit: Oh, and no, I didn't read the EVO forums post.
Air coming off the turbo can easily hit 200 degrees farenhiet, I dont know that water/alky could drop the temp like a small intercooler could...
what you have to remember is that these planes were @ multiple hundreds of miles an hour (400ish) to keep things cool. they did use water and nitrous injection for added power and stability. they made roughly 1000-1500 hp but these were on multi cylinder radial motors.. it's a little easier to boost semi-high and keep it cool w/o intercoolers at higher levels altitude (much colder) and moving much quicker (relative temp reached sooner). Make sense?
Inverted V12; it was one of the first to use fuel injection, im pretty sure it didn't use n2o.
i think most WW2 fighters used V12 configuration, the me109, p51 mustang, etc.
OH no!. I am really not flaming you because you sound unsure. But atomized water suspended in the intake manifold has many times the cooling effect of an intercooler. This is due in part to the large collective surface area of the particles (much larger than the area of fins you can fit in an intercooler) AND the ability of water to suck the heat energy out of the air because of its property of specific heat. But the greatest effect is when it enters the combustion chamber where it actually vaporizes completely, taking heat right out of the chamber (the heat enerjy is used up converting the water micro-dropletts to vapor). This in turn indirectly raised your octane level in the combustion chamber. It's like running 101 all the time with premium gas prices.
If you were to go with a "straight pipe" and just WI. I would activate the system early in the onset of boost and have it modulated by boost or mass air flow. It takes time (relatively) for the thermal processes to become effective. I know from personal experience that with my setup (smallish fmic + WI) after a hard 25psi run on a 90* day, my ENTIRE intake manifold is COLD to the touch (not just cool to the touch).
Go here for great WI info and even official government experimentation with water injection for their forced induced aircraft for world war two. Water injection: good enough for government work .
EDITED: for my spelling and typing issues
It just has a pipe that comes off of the outlet, and right up into the throttle body elbow, with the bov in between. I believe that the idea would work great, but the only drawback is that you must rely on the water/alcy injection, or you will cause too much heat and detonation. Oh, and the Colt runs 12 psi of boost, and I have logged it with zero counts of knock, without an intercooler and no w/i. Maybe I should put a w/i kit together just to see how it would run on windshield washer fluid, after I swap the 14b, 90 ecu, and 450's.
this guy ran 19psi on his merkur and recorded better temp drops (150*F on average) on WI alone than with his AWIC alone- and this is with an $80 homemade kit. works out to somewhere around 65-70% intercooling efficiency.
as was said before though too, WI works where an IC can't: INSIDE the combustion chamber.
plenty of cars came from the factory without intercoolers. turbo tbirds, older saabs and volvos, TGP's, TGA/sunbirds.
champ cars don't use intercoolers, they use methanol injection (and methanol fuel, of course). there's an injector at the outlet of the turbo.
i see no reason why you shouldn't be able to run 15+psi on just WI. the T3-60 that ed key was running is far less efficient than a 14b at those PR's, so your inlet temps will likely be even lower than his. i'm going to disagree with the naysayers and say go for it.
As the air heats up the water, the heat energy leaves the air. Same amount of heat energy with more particles to heat equals cooler temperatures. It takes ALOT of air at 212 degrees farenheit to heat water to steam. If this happens, get a larger water injector. But nevertheless, it doesn't mater as much if the air doesn't cool because once the water reaches the combustion chamber the heat energy there is absorbed by the water and indirectly raising the octane of the gas. The cooling of the combustion chamber and the steam that remains actually controls the flame front and keeps it from expanding too rapidly which is detonation.
. but i am very willing to try this.
As for numbers. I think water absorbs about twice the heat. Injecting just alcohol will increase your fill-up times. and it is not as free as water . Everyone says a 50-50 mix works best. It also is a neccesity in the winter. I use 50% water 50% rubbing alcohol (which is 30% water). I have never had a frozen line in the winter. I tested with both straight water and the 50-50 mix and i got no knock either way at 20+ psi on stock fuel components, stock sidemount, and a small 16G.
see that makes me want to do it even more, i do not know about you guys but how worth while is a stock sidemount anyway, i do not think it would do anything at all when you inject water. ya i am definitely going to do water mostly. i talked to coolingmist people today and asked if it would be a good idea to run water injection instead of an intercooler. he immediately said yes, but the nice thing about an intercooler is that it is a back up device if you run out of water or something, as opposed to just water injection without an intercooler because if you run out of water while boosting high your screwed. he also told me if i am running rich to compensate for the heat of the 14b, then it would be better to run just water because you can lean the curve out more and increase boost. the other thing i was wondering is were i would put the maft. i like it in blow thru because you get a more accurate air count right before it goes into the throttlebody, but if i were to run it in the pipe ( cant say upper pipe because there would only be one) it might heat the maf too much as the air has not been cooled yet. do you think the maf can handle really high heat? another thing is the maf takes up room were the injector can be placed right after the turbo, i would have to relocate the injectors higher in the piping. the easiest way would be to run the maft in the draw through position, dont you think?
anyway get back to me you guys on these questions, this is getting really interesting and if it goes well, this could mean you could run a bigger turbo with a lot faster spool, and more useable powerband. how much faster do you guys think this would make spool up, i know making the piping shorter on my 14b with the frontmount made the turbo spool much faster.
talk to you guys later