Question for you Speed Density guys
understood just posting that so someone doesn't cram it in three like an ofh fitting !
http://www.nzefi.com/product/inlet-air-temperature-sensor/
Says same curve as popular gm Delphi units..
Last edited by 211Ratsbud; Jan 16, 2014 at 02:57 AM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 491
Likes: 1
From: Redmond Washington
http://www.linkecu.com/products/Inst...airtempsensors
Bump for experience with the AIT downstream of a WMi nozzle. I placed my GM AIT in the UICP and the WMi nozzle in the LUICP just in front of the air box. Seemed logical to account for the charge cooling.
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 491
Likes: 1
From: Redmond Washington
If so, I would say an upside is you should get stellar vaporization of the water/meth, because the air is hot there, and it has a long path from there to the cylinders, so, more time to evaporate. This should get the water/meth more evenly distributed to the cylinders, which of itself should be worth a lot. And you would be less likely to have a big ol' dumb droplet of water landing on your IAT probe, because there probably won't be any big ol' dumb droplets by the time it's gone that far.
A downside would be, you are getting probably less effect from your intercooler than otherwise. The intercooler can reject more heat to atmosphere if there is more temp difference between the air inside it and the atmosphere. You are cooling off the air quite a bit before it even gets into the intercooler, thereby losing some heat rejection. Your air temps in the intake manifold should be lower if you let the air go into the intercooler hot, then shoot the water/meth in after the intercooler for further cooling.
Another possible downside could be mist dropping out of the air and puddling in the intercooler tanks. This could be nasty if a puddle all of a sudden takes off into the air again, then you have a slug of water going to the engine which you wouldn't want. Don't know how much this is really going to happen, but Richard L of Aquamist has talked about this.
A question this brings up is, do you really want to vaporize as much of the water/meth as possible before it gets into the cylinders? Or is it better to have only some of it vaporized and some that is merely atomized (or in very small droplets)? That I don't know, but I think ideally you want some of both.
Last edited by Talonboost; Jan 16, 2014 at 02:51 PM.
Sorry, lemme clarify: I'm running the stock upper IC pipes of which there are two, so I was referring to the lower-upper IC pipe (post IC).
On thread - I'm curious if the IAT change when spraying will be a good thing to account for as the car is going to be running dual maps, one maximum lameness CA91, and the other 50/50 WMi. That's why I put the IAT downrange of the nozzle.
If anyone has experience with this it'd be great to have some advice on the effect to the tune. I don't generally drive in sub-freezing weather, but 40-100F+ is normal over the year.
On thread - I'm curious if the IAT change when spraying will be a good thing to account for as the car is going to be running dual maps, one maximum lameness CA91, and the other 50/50 WMi. That's why I put the IAT downrange of the nozzle.
If anyone has experience with this it'd be great to have some advice on the effect to the tune. I don't generally drive in sub-freezing weather, but 40-100F+ is normal over the year.
What is the LUICP? Do you mean the LICP? Air on its way to the intercooler?
If so, I would say an upside is you should get stellar vaporization of the water/meth, because the air is hot there, and it has a long path from there to the cylinders, so, more time to evaporate. This should get the water/meth more evenly distributed to the cylinders, which of itself should be worth a lot. And you would be less likely to have a big ol' dumb droplet of water landing on your IAT probe, because there probably won't be any big ol' dumb droplets by the time it's gone that far.
A downside would be, you are getting probably less effect from your intercooler than otherwise. The intercooler can reject more heat to atmosphere if there is more temp difference between the air inside it and the atmosphere. You are cooling off the air quite a bit before it even gets into the intercooler, thereby losing some heat rejection. Your air temps in the intake manifold should be lower if you let the air go into the intercooler hot, then shoot the water/meth in after the intercooler for further cooling.
Another possible downside could be mist dropping out of the air and puddling in the intercooler tanks. This could be nasty if a puddle all of a sudden takes off into the air again, then you have a slug of water going to the engine which you wouldn't want. Don't know how much this is really going to happen, but Richard L of Aquamist has talked about this.
A question this brings up is, do you really want to vaporize as much of the water/meth as possible before it gets into the cylinders? Or is it better to have only some of it vaporized and some that is merely atomized (or in very small droplets)? That I don't know, but I think ideally you want some of both.
If so, I would say an upside is you should get stellar vaporization of the water/meth, because the air is hot there, and it has a long path from there to the cylinders, so, more time to evaporate. This should get the water/meth more evenly distributed to the cylinders, which of itself should be worth a lot. And you would be less likely to have a big ol' dumb droplet of water landing on your IAT probe, because there probably won't be any big ol' dumb droplets by the time it's gone that far.
A downside would be, you are getting probably less effect from your intercooler than otherwise. The intercooler can reject more heat to atmosphere if there is more temp difference between the air inside it and the atmosphere. You are cooling off the air quite a bit before it even gets into the intercooler, thereby losing some heat rejection. Your air temps in the intake manifold should be lower if you let the air go into the intercooler hot, then shoot the water/meth in after the intercooler for further cooling.
Another possible downside could be mist dropping out of the air and puddling in the intercooler tanks. This could be nasty if a puddle all of a sudden takes off into the air again, then you have a slug of water going to the engine which you wouldn't want. Don't know how much this is really going to happen, but Richard L of Aquamist has talked about this.
A question this brings up is, do you really want to vaporize as much of the water/meth as possible before it gets into the cylinders? Or is it better to have only some of it vaporized and some that is merely atomized (or in very small droplets)? That I don't know, but I think ideally you want some of both.
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 491
Likes: 1
From: Redmond Washington
Sorry, lemme clarify: I'm running the stock upper IC pipes of which there are two, so I was referring to the lower-upper IC pipe (post IC).
On thread - I'm curious if the IAT change when spraying will be a good thing to account for as the car is going to be running dual maps, one maximum lameness CA91, and the other 50/50 WMi. That's why I put the IAT downrange of the nozzle.
On thread - I'm curious if the IAT change when spraying will be a good thing to account for as the car is going to be running dual maps, one maximum lameness CA91, and the other 50/50 WMi. That's why I put the IAT downrange of the nozzle.
) or any MAF there in the blow-through position where it would have water/meth blowing through it. And, vent to atmosphere Blow-off valve - where? In the lower intercooler pipe I guess? Dual maps - with and without water/meth. Yup yup. Ooo I've got 92 octane here though 
Yeah I agree, bump for anybody doing it this way to comment on the effect to the tune.
Last edited by Talonboost; Jan 17, 2014 at 12:14 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dw cuz
General Engine Management / Tuning Forum
26
Oct 13, 2016 05:08 AM