JGB1600

Your safety measures will have a lot to do with the WI system. Some systems have great integrated safety features which can output to your ecu to reduce boost or switch maps should something go wrong with water supply. Which water injection system are you planning on using?

No difference at all. I literally just unplugged the HFS3 control unit and plugged in the HFS4. Still need to enable some of the extra features.

If you can change the haltech maps via a switched input then this is easily achieved. The Aquamist unit outputs to the ecu when it is turned on and off. This signal can be used to change maps. This is pretty much how I have it set up on my car.

The draw backs for a street car/daily driver as I see them are, the availability of e85, the cost of both set and running of e85 compared to water meth injection, lack of consistency of pump e85, consumption (which almost doubles with e85) and the convenience. Yes, flex fuel sensors might address some of these issues but once you start mixing e85 with 98, your power levels will take a dive. With the WI, as long as you have water or water meth in the tank, the power is the when you want it and you can switch it off when not needed so there is no wastage. I guess it all comes down to personal preference in the end. Both e85 and WI have proven their ability to produce excellent results, especially on boosted cars. For my situation, in the pros and cons comparison, WI was the clear winner which is why it was chosen. I think the application of the vehicle will play a major role in deciding which option to pick.

The WI system Im using has 3 factory set fail safes and 1 aux failsafe input. The factory failsafes are: level sensor in tank water high (detects leak between the injection solenoid and the nozzles) water low (detects leak between the tank and the injection solenoid) The aux failsafe allows the use the input a signal such air temp of o2 to trigger the failsafe. Once the failsafe is triggered, the user receives two visual indications via the dash mounted gauge. In conjunction, the control unit outputs a signal which can be set by the user to either switch to a lower boost setting or to a safe map. Mine is set to map switch will also cut boost and ignition momentarily. Luke gtr, I am a firm believe that water injection is a viable alternative to e85, especially for boosted street cars. It offers all the benefits of e85 without the drawbacks. Although I did not conduct a back to back test of e85 vs WMI, I believe that a correctly optimised WMI system could produce results equivalent to running e85. Cheers

I will more than likely add the boost injection set point and there is definitely room to optimise injection set points for max torque and power requirements. So far I'm happy with the default injection settings with the linear ramp rate. Optimisation may be the next experiment, but gains may not be worth the time & dollars spent on the dyno testing. IMO, you will feel tangible difference on the street with a constant pressure pump (if that's what you were alluding to). Being able to control your atomisation precisely at low rpm/throttle position means I can increase my mass flow through the engine earlier without the risk of damage from poor atomisation. Creating more mass flow has the added effect of building boost earlier in the rev range. You also want the best atomisation possible for pre turbo injection to limit any potential compressor wear over time if you are an aggressive user. Im guessing others don't do it so they can price there systems accordingly. There is definitely a market there for those that are on a budget and/or don't require a system with all the functionality that the Aquamist units offer. Cheers

The control unit can be configured to be triggered by either injector duty cycle, boost pressure or a mixture of both. The website below explains it in more detail. http://howertonengineering.com/hfs-4-injection-mapping/ I use only injector duty cycle as I couldnt tap into the internal Autronics map sensor. There was the option to set up an external map sensor but time constraints prevented this from happening. It will be captured in the next upgrade. The IDC trigger is set at factory set to begin at 40%, with a linear ramp rate. The control unit has a 0-5v output from the flow sensor which can be connected to an ECU input for data logging. I will have this function operating on my car in the near future and post a log of the injection cycle. Cheers

My car is on a transporter at the moment on the way to Cairns. I'll retrieve the requested data once it arrives in a few weeks. Water injection could very well be the alternative you are looking for and we'll worth considering.

Just water. That was as much as we could push it with the single 450cc nozzle. I should have experienced a little more with that set up but I broke the rb20 gearbox not long after that upgrade. While converting to a rb25 turbo box things kinda spiralled out of control and here we are! In response to the previous post, the car is quite a handful now. The acceleration is phenomenal! I posted a link to a quick vid of acceleration testing.

Acceleration testing

I can't remember what the difference in timing was so I'll have to double check. Fuel was reduced for the water meth injection tuning.

Would have liked to have done an e85 comparison at the same time but as I stated earlier, the cost of an e85 set up, especially just for an experiment, couldn't be justified

No I'm not. I invested a lot of time researching and conducting this experiment so I thought I'd do it some justice and do a decent write up.

Gday guys, Thought Id throw a post up about my experiment with water and water/meth injection and the results. First off, the test bed for this little experiment was my FJ20T powered Datsun 1600. The engine mods are as follows, * Engine rebuilt back in 2007 by Stewart Wilkins. Nothing fancy, just forged pistons and a clean up of the inlet and exhaust ports * Garrett GT3071r turbo with a twin scroll .78 rear housing * Custom split pulse manifold with twin v44 tial waste gates * 3 exhaust system with plumb back waste gates * Autronic SM4 ecu and CDI 500r * FMIC * 750cc injectors In 2011, I stumble across water injection while surfing the net. After 6 month of further research, which involve speaking with several mechanical engineers, I decided to set up a water injection system on my car. Through my research, I found that the key to a successful system that works and works well is precise control of the injection rate and correct atomisation of the fluid being injected. With this in mind, I decided to go with the Aquamist HFS3 water injection system. This unit was, and still is head and shoulders above the competition with regards to build quality, performance and price. Aquamist systems are the only systems that use constant pump pressure (160 psi) and pulse width modulation to control injection. Other systems use progressive pump speed to control injection. This creates very poor atomisation at less then 50% duty cycle and a delay in the starting and stopping of injection. For precise control, utilising a constant pressure pump coupled with a fast acting solenoid valve critically allow correct atomisation of the fluid. Through the use of water/methanol I wanted to pull as much heat out of my system. When a liquid is atomised it becomes easier to vaporise. Simplistically, heat is absorbed when the atomised liquid changes state to vapour. Cooling your air temp increases its density allowing for more fuel and more bang. As the final part of this state change occurs during compression, a torque advantage was also welcomed. The HFS3 unit was installed using a single, 1mm injection nozzle, located in the inlet pipe just after the intercooler. When the car was tuned with this setup, it made 280rwkw @ 26psi with water injection and 258kw @ 23 psi without water injection. Pump 98 was the base fuel and the ambient air temp was about 30 degrees on the day of testing. A few weeks ago, I decided to upgrade my set up to the latest Aquamist HFS4 water injection system. As I wanted to push the water injection system as far as possible this time, as well as experiment with 50:50 water meth mix, I decided to use a total of 6 injection nozzles. 110cc nozzles were installed in each intake runner. These nozzles incorporate a built in check valve to prevent water been sucked out under vacuum. The original 110 cc nozzle was left in place in the inlet piping just after the intercooler and an additional 50cc nozzle was installed in the intake before the turbo. Aquamist recommends jetting your system for 1-1.5cc/1hp. I was aiming for around 400hp, I went with 1.5 cc/1hp, which required 600cc. The install was completed in a day and the car was tuned last Thursday by Yavus at Unigroup engineering. Again, base fuel was pump 98. Air temp was a cool 18 degrees Celsius. The results are as follows: · 267kw @ 22 psi on pump 98 · 291kw @ 25 psi on pump 98 + 100% water injection · 312kw @ 30 psi on pump 98 + 50:50 water/meth NB: water/methanol is mixed on a mass basis. These results were obtained during the same dyno session. No changes to ambient were observed during the testing. It is also interesting to note that a maximum figure of 302 kW was achieved on pump 98 + 100% water injection; however detonation was observed when back to back run were completed. As a result, timing was reduced for protection as we realised we were right on the limit. In this case, the limiting factor was the flow rate of water. We had simply reached the limit where there wasnt sufficient cooling. We had the option to increase the mass water flow by upsizing the post intercooler nozzle however, this would have required recalibrating the failsafes and was decided against due to the time constraints. There is a lot of misinformation circling the internet and club meetings about water injection. I hope this test has demonstrated that when a quality system is set up correctly, it works extremely well. This set up me cost around $2500 to purchase, install and tune and netted a 9% and 17% power gain for water and water/methanol respectively over typical pump 98. When comparing capital and operating expenditure, a water injection system will stack up favourably to be one of the cheapest $/kW power upgrades available to the boosted aftermarket. With my system sitting at approximately $56/kW (water/meth), I think most would agree its an absolute bargain and in my opinion is an option well worth considering for those looking for a healthy performance gain from their boosted rides. Looking forward to see the journey of others who choose to experiment down this path Please feel free to post any questions you make have and Ill do my best to answer them. Cheers. http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l535/Theboostshack/20150610_214703_zpsdihqh4zk.jpg http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l535/Theboostshack/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG-20150615-WA0023_zpsaoqnx1t5.jpg http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l535/Theboostshack/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2015-06-19-06-04-35-1_zpsyqyku8je.png http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l535/Theboostshack/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2015-06-19-06-04-25-1_zpslatoyunk.png http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l535/Theboostshack/Mobile%20Uploads/20150623_010748_zpslsaao29o.jpg

After testing of the 3071r and 5558 are done, I will be upgrading to a 6262 twin scroll. I have already purchased this turbo and have begun building the manifold to suit. With a few supporting mods such a 2000cc ID injectors, cams and a RB25det gear box, I'm hoping to crack the 400rwkw barrier. Here are a few pics of my 6262 vs my mates 5558:

Haha. Maybe mate. Hope any confusion has been clarified now.

Water injection will have a negative affect on your engine performance if it isn't metered, atomised and tuned correctly. Get it right, which isn't hard, and there are significant power gains to be had. Mitcho_7, you are correct that the old manifold could have been hampering the power. On closer inspection it had a very poor collector design, runners which differed significantly in length and a single waste gate configuration. The replacement manifold which I designed and built has a far superior collector, runners which are almost equal in length and twin waste gates. It has also been power ported with each runner flowing between 204 and 210 CFM.

No typo. My engine was build with quite low compression, 7.9:1 I think. Because of its low volumectric efficiency, it needs more boost to make the power. Plus running standard cams as well don't help the cause. That said, the power being made with the 30171r is still quite respectable. I have witnessed an sr20 running a 3076 @ 22 psi making 260rwkw. This was on the Unigroup engineering dyno which is where I get my car tuned.

The engine has been rebuilt with forged piston and port work to the cylinder head. Cams are still standard. I will definitely run som proper boost through the 5558 as that's what they are made for! I currently run two maps and I will have both tuned for each turbo set up. One for pump 98 and the other for pump 98+water injection provided by an aquamist HFS3 system. Made 295 rwkw @ 28 psi using pump 98+water injection with the 3071r. This is compared to 304 rwkw using c16. I can't speak highly enough of the water injection and once you have set up and tuned it, it's cheap as chips to run. 30 rwkw when ever you want for under a grand fitted and tuned! Can't argue with those results!

Hi guys, I've been following this thread with quite a bit of interest and thought I'd share some info on my project. I running an FJ20det which I swapped from my old DR30 skyline into my 1600. The previous turbo setup used a Fantasy split pulse single waste gate manifold and a twin scroll GT3071r and made 265rwkw on 22psi. I have since built my own twin scroll manifold with twin waste gates for the 3071r. I have also built a manifold for a Vband in and out Precision 5558 which a friend of mine sources from PJs Quick Bits. I will be doing a back to back test of both these turbos on my FJ in the next few weeks and will post the results. Cheers