Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

LAWL well Im at work, so I cant divulge into massive detail.

I have just bought a Snow Performance kit, which I have seen a couple of other members run, and paid about $470 delivered. Its got a digital controller that can plot water volume relative to boost, and has start/end point adjustments so you can configure your car to run it on high boost only or whatever else you want to do.

Aquamist systems seem more popular in the US and are fitted to all the cars in the european rally championship. I dont know much about those kits other than they have the brand name in the market.

Water more or less quenches the heat in the boost charge and turns into steam when it does so. Steam ends up acting like boost and increases your dynamic compression ration. More or less you will end up with double the cooling effort of a good quality FMIC (or better) and will be able to put more boost and timing into the mix without detonation. I am doing this as a replacement to E85 as I want to retain my 98 setup. I will be running straight demineralised water (no alcohol as I want to keep this perfectly feasible).

Application specific data I have found is that it takes 60*c out of charge temps and 100*c out of EGT's. That would add a massive amount of ping resistance to regular piss 98, without the worry of varying content flex fuel or needing to stock up a bloody CSR E85 drum in your garage. No Jerry cans when you head to the track either. f**k Jerry, I hate that prick.

If set up right I am anticipating it will make reaching the maximum flow from a compressor a lot easier, and will help bring boost on stronger. The cooling effect will stop the 98 going off before its meant to, and the resultant dynamic compression will put more volume through the turbine and in essence bring it on faster and harder (like a high comp motor).

Also, everything post nozzle will be squeaky clean :) if your motor ever blows you will think you blew a brand new motor by how little carbon build up you will find in the IM and ports :thumbsup:

Damn you Jez, starting this topic 10mins after I posted in another thread.

Copied from the HG thread:

"with the WMI kits, would it be "better" to spend the extra 150 odd bux for a progressive type system as opposed to the old on/off Hobbs switch setup????

Have been looking int WMI for a long time and the $$$ seems about right to grab one."

Mafia said that little tank lasted 1 tank of fuel on his thread. I think he must have been thrashing it the entire tank lol.

I am aiming to have my car tuned well without WMI then try to add WMI from that point on. I will probably have Jez focus his tuning on actuator pressure first, then maybe up to 10 or 12psi without any WMI, then we can introduce the WMI and see where it ends up.

I want to know if im out of water I can simply hit the low boost or turn the EBC off and keep hammering on. More convenient than being stuck in goulburn with no E85 stations around lol.

Question time

Mafia, by the looks of your pics your just using water yeh??

How long does your tank last?

And is ther much of a gain to be had running water/meth as opposed to just water?

From What i understand the methanol in the mix will increase the effective octane of the fuel. Feel free to correct me if i'm wrong.

Mafia said that little tank lasted 1 tank of fuel on his thread. I think he must have been thrashing it the entire tank lol.

I am aiming to have my car tuned well without WMI then try to add WMI from that point on. I will probably have Jez focus his tuning on actuator pressure first, then maybe up to 10 or 12psi without any WMI, then we can introduce the WMI and see where it ends up.

I want to know if im out of water I can simply hit the low boost or turn the EBC off and keep hammering on. More convenient than being stuck in goulburn with no E85 stations around lol.

This is my idea of how to do it as well.

So when it runs out you simply go back to what you previously ran.

I would have to get a different actuator then to be able to have the variance because right now it's 20psi +

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Well.... it's not just "de-oxygenating". If you do that you just have, most likely, ethane. So you still need to do a synthesis step to combine a number of ethanes/ethanols to make circa-8-chain hydrocarbons. And of course you don't want straight chain HCs, because n-octane actually has a negative octane rating (ie, it's worse even than the n-heptane which sets the zero on the octane scale!), so you have to do some tricky catalytic chemistry to synthesise branched HCs. That's all doable - but it doesn't come for free. And.... it starts with ethanol, which is an agricultural product, and there will almost certainly never be enough of that as a base stock to replace the liquid fuels that are in use. You really wouldn't want to be planning to be using any more ethanol for fuels than is currently already used (in E10, E85s, etc). And ideally you'd be looking to reduce such usage, as it is largely wasteful, particularly in the stupid-ole'US-of-A where the corn lobby has organised it so that it's actually primary production corn that is used to make a lot of the ethanol, not by-products and waste, like it is (mostly) elsewhere. So, what I said about needing free-ish energy probably still applies. True synth fuels would be made from H2 and CO2, in a near reversal of the combustion process. In fact, given that the H2 would be split from water first, it actually is a complete reversal of the combustion process. But...energy intensive. The human race burns something like 1 cubic MILE of crude oil, after it has been made into various fuels. Every year. That's a simply stupendous amount of energy. Just assume that the density is 900 kg/m3, and that the calorific value is 45 MJ/kg, then that is 165.9 x10^12 MJ of energy. Or more than 10^19 Joules. You get a maximum of 1 kJ/s per square meter solar radiation falling on the planet's surface, and so if you halve that for daylight, and halve it again for average weather (highly optimistic) and then take ~25% for the very best efficiency of solar panels, then you need about 85.7 billion square metres of solar panels to generate enough electricity to replace that liquid fuel energy consumption. Each panel is about 1m2. That's a rather large number of panels. We also burn about a cubic mile of coal. We also use hydroelectric power. We also use nuclear. We also use a number of other sources, both "renewable" and not. You can kind of ignore the renewable ones (except for hydro, because it will all end up getting subsumed into pumped hydro for storing other renewables, and so it won't be the standalone renewable that it originally was), so we end up needing a multiple of the ground area number that I just arrived at.
    • Corvette thread then? Don't say I didn't predict the future again. "I love the little MX5, I do, but I just want something a little easier to get in/out of, a little more cushy and some power would be nice - I miss the V8 Rumble... I found this clean red C5 for sale recently and..." I'll do you a great deal on the next step, which is one of those but you can fit people in it, too.
    • What about renewable diesel and/or gasoline? I see some projects spinning up like de-oxygenating ethanol to make drop-in compatible bio-gasoline especially in CA. I still think the future is EVs and we should've all gone full throttle on nuclear power after the 1973 oil crisis like France. Despite 15 years of work in CA to reduce the CO2 intensity of generation with renewables our electric grid is still far worse than even "low carbon" nuclear power. ICE is pretty cool when you aren't depending on the stupid thing to be practical and reliable and cheap as possible to get you to work every day. It's kind of like mechanical watches or vacuum tube amps.
    • I just rolled over "my" first 10k km in the MX5 Every time I go anywhere it always ends up in a adventure to look at houses and find some random country roads I've been on leave since early November but unfortunately need to go back to work on 19 January Luckily though I still have a fair chunk of leave left to burn until.... Not that I'm counting 😁
    • These look like S13 wheels.  And Welcome! 
×
×
  • Create New...