dsm-onster
DSM Wiseman
- 8,592
- 124
- Jul 11, 2004
-
Bloxom,
Virginia
A agree, and disagree.
Yes water may be able to dissipate more heat. But it has other flaws that make using it impractical.
Because of it's high density and zero flash point, you can't run as much water through compressor as you can meth. So while lb for lb water will cool more efficiently, you can't use as much of it to cool.
Getting the water droplets down to a manageable size is impractical when compared to methanol.
It's not combustible. So you are filling up your cylinders with space that could be occupied by air or fuel.
Up to a point I suppose your right... but for a practical everyday use meth is far superior in every way IMO. I've tried both on my cars. From what I've seen, 100% meth always out performs 50/50 or straight.
I was only talking about wet compression (pre compressor). Cooling the air as it passes into and part way through the compressor is not what wet injection is about. It is about the sudden transformation of liquid to gas at the blade tips. Water and methanol both flash (explosively) at about the ends of the blade just before the air cascades into the compressor volute. Since both flash instantly at the point neccesary, the chemical that absorbes the most heat in the proccess is the most beneficial.
If water were injected properly (right at the compressor nut), then all is fine with droplet size with typical water injection kit pressures. Folks report being concerned of of compressor damage; but when injecting right on the hub, there's been practically no reports of actual compressor damage due to the injection.
Now post compressor there's lots of differing opinions. But all commonly agree: the more meth the better.