No intercooler, more power?

[91-gsx]

I was wondering sense we usually have to run an intercooler for high boost, and just stock boost in general. If we were to make system that just consists of a 2.5" tube that goes from the turbo to the throttle body, a bov in the middle and no intercooler at all. Would there be an increase in horsepower if we were to keep the final throttle body temperature the same? I ask this because an intercooler is worth a lot of horsepower and cooling don't get me wrong, I run a fmic myself. I just wanted to know in theory if it would be worth removing a restriction like the interooler for more power and faster spool in any car, IF the final temperature at the throttle body is the same? I think most of us on the forums are very familiar with water/alcohol injection. I wanted to use water because methanol is not easy for me to find, and water also absorbs more heat and requires less volume injected, while alcohol is going to need about 3 times as much to start seeing benefits over water. Thanks for the help, and please do not be biased. Like I said I have a 3.5" thick race fmic, so I know what they do.

 

[Kevin Jewer]

If you could keep the charge temps the same of course removing the restriction would free up horsepower and spool. But it's like asking if you can get rid of those heavy pistons if you could keep cylinder pressures the same to make the engine rev freely... I think the question you really mean to ask is what it would take to keep charge temps down while eliminating the FMIC. I don't think any kind of add on injection system is going to do it, only a full conversion to methanol is known to allow people to run without ICs, and that's old news.

 

[TunaTalon]

You have the theory right. With all else the same, less restriction means more horsepower. The Problem is keeping all else the same.

The theory is old. The Rolls Royce Merlin aircraft engine that won the battle of Britain used a low loss intercooler and a low loss aftercooler for cruising and with a ME 109 on their tail went to higher boost and ethylene glycol injection. A lot of Nazi pilots lost to that combination. And the losing plane had no trailer ride home.

 

[DSM_PWR]

Check out this vid. Even though we dont all have track cars, your theory has been done
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FONRQ8awgDU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FONRQ8awgDU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[91-gsx]

Lol. Thanks men, but by no means is this my theory. The part were it becomes mine is when you get more boost off of running just water. I wanted to route the intercooler tubing just like this; From the turbo to the driver's side like my current side to side flowing intercooler, then the tube will go across the front like a fmic, then back into the engine bay via the passenger side radiator support, and finally into the throttle body. You might ask why the disgustingly long tubing??? Well, for the most complete vaporization and cooling of the water molecules. If the water goes through the tubing from the outlet of the turbo, it is going to do wayyyyyy more then if I were to simply inject the water at the throttle body. The funny thing is when you ask the water/alcohol injection companies about placement of a temp sensor in the tract to be able to get the best possible readings. They tell you that the reading you are getting is the temp of the air and water mixture at that moment in time, The temperature of the air will go down greatly even in the distance from the throttle body to the intake manifold. Now imagine injecting it through the tubing I described above, pretty sure it will work.

 

[TunaTalon]

Have you done the math?
The heat of vaporization of water is 970 BTU/Lb.
The specific heat of water is 1 BTU/Lb per degree F.
The specific heat of air is 0.24 BTU/Lb per degree F.
The heat of compression raises air pressure more than the pressure ratio by an exponent of 1.4.
The efficiency of a Turbo varies with the operating conditions but is likely to be less than 70%.

I have no idea how much water in the charge is "too much" but the water vapor will displace air and affect the air/fuel ratio.

Hmmmmm. This could get complicated.

 

[DSM_PWR]

lets call bill (the science guy)

 

[turboglenn]

lets call bill (the science guy)

That would be Bill Nuy the Science Guy :

i've asked this sam question and plan to test it on my DD as soon as i develope my pump + meth tune completely up to 26 psi with no knock using the front mount. Then i will go back to 15psi and start turning it up again all over without an intercooler and injecting water in 3 spots for maximum vaporization, while keeping one at the TB ellbow to get pure water droplets into the combustion chamber to slow the burn down to equal that of race gas or similar.

We will see, only datalogs and numbers will tell the truth

 

[91-gsx]

If the water were to turn into steam in the piping, then you will get more vaporized and pure, basically distilled water droplets. When you inject water much closer to the turbo, and give it a longer distance to break up and absorb heat from the air. You will first use a lot less water then pure methanol that is for sure. You will cool down all the tubing and prevent heat soak. And worst comes to the worse, if you find you need a little more water to cool, then just add it. BUT it still would benefit you more if you added that extra flow as far away from the throttle body as possible, but after the intercooler, like they tell you in every water injection thread and every water injection website. In this case, there is no intercooler, so you run it right after the turbo for the best results that all of us don't ever get to see because of our intercooler being there. Now don't get me wrong. If you are trying to run methanol only and are depending on its fueling, then closest to the throttle body is best, or better yet 1 injector in each runner for perfect fueling. I'm just saying the longer the distance, even a few inches, makes the biggest difference in vaporization and heat exchange. I say a 2-step injection system with a boost source that goes to 2 injection triggers. The injectors should both be placed opposite to each other in the tube, but not within misting range so that they do not interrupt each others ability to mist. The first injector should be about 1/5 of the volume that you need and the other injector should make up the other 4/5. First one should come on at 4psi and the other at 15psi. This is a rough estimate, but should be close enough to were a little extra pump pressure might come in handy.
Thanks for the input