Notices
Water / Methanol Injection / Nitrous Oxide

Water injection for autocross

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 02:11 PM
  #1  
EVO8LTW's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,606
Likes: 98
From: Northern Virginia
Water injection for autocross

I have an SMC v2 kit and am interested in setting it up to run straight water. Is anyone here running straight water? I imagine that the jet that came with the SMC kit (7 gph) is probably too big for just water. Not sure what the right size would be for straight water, or how to calculate it?

Before someone tells me to just run alky or meth, I'm interested in participating in SCCA autocrosses with the car (alky or meth aren't allowed in street class) and would prefer to stick with pump gas while getting the extra power and safety of water injection.

Thanks.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 02:14 PM
  #2  
Warrtalon's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 20,790
Likes: 2
From: Long Island, NY
Rich, I don't have your answer, but I wanted to clarify that alky/meth injection is not legal in any class. The karts are able to use methanol fuel, but they also can be the only things moving when it is their turn.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 03:05 PM
  #3  
SlowCar's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,456
Likes: 0
From: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
~10 to 15% water to fuel to fuel ratio.

assuming you are using stock injectors
560*4*0.10=224cc/min

224/63 = 3.56gph water @ 10% water to fuel ratio

Last edited by SlowCar; Jan 4, 2007 at 03:13 PM.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 06:07 AM
  #4  
9sec9's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 1
From: Oklahoma
agree with slowcar, 10% of whatever your fuel requirement is. Heat latency of water is twice as high as methanol so it requires much less of it to do the COOLING job.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 06:08 AM
  #5  
9sec9's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 1
From: Oklahoma
I would keep pressure at least at 150psi or higher.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 06:12 AM
  #6  
9sec9's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 1
From: Oklahoma
AT 10%, you can expect about 18 degrees centigrade temp reduction on intake air.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 06:24 AM
  #7  
rburris28's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: Western North Carolina
Originally Posted by SlowCar
~10 to 15% water to fuel to fuel ratio.

assuming you are using stock injectors
560*4*0.10=224cc/min

224/63 = 3.56gph water @ 10% water to fuel ratio
I don't know anything about this, but didn't you just change cubic centimeters per minute into gallons per hour without a conversion factor?
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 06:36 AM
  #8  
9sec9's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 1
From: Oklahoma
If you've maxed your 560cc fuel injectors, then 224 would be correct. Actual fuel requirement is needed however, to calculate the water needed, since more than likely the 'jet size' will be a fixed volume. That is unless you use something like Snows 25d2 controller which measures airflow and boost.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 10:04 AM
  #9  
SlowCar's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,456
Likes: 0
From: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Originally Posted by rburris28
I don't know anything about this, but didn't you just change cubic centimeters per minute into gallons per hour without a conversion factor?
sorri about the quick math

1GPH = 63cc/min
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 10:15 AM
  #10  
EVO8LTW's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,606
Likes: 98
From: Northern Virginia
9sec9, I'm a little confused by your suggestions. I have an SMC kit which operates at about 100 psi with the included jet. Are you saying that you need more pressure with water than meth/alky to sufficiently atomize?

Is it a bad idea to use a boost-based controller like the SMC with pure water? It would inject the same amount of water at 4000 rpm as at 7000 rpm, given the same boost level, though the amount of fuel injected would clearly be a lot higher at higher RPM. So I guess it would inject too much at low RPM and not enough at higher RPM? I suppose this is where systems like Aquamist triggered off the fuel injectors come into play. This is starting to sound more complicated to implement than I was thinking...
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 10:19 AM
  #11  
SlowCar's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,456
Likes: 0
From: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Originally Posted by 9sec9
If you've maxed your 560cc fuel injectors, then 224 would be correct. Actual fuel requirement is needed however, to calculate the water needed, since more than likely the 'jet size' will be a fixed volume. That is unless you use something like Snows 25d2 controller which measures airflow and boost.
or better still, the aquamist 2D system. the high speed valve pulses insync w/ the fuel injector thereby maintaining a constant water to fuel ratio.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 11:51 AM
  #12  
bullfrg's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (42)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 922
Likes: 0
From: Idaho
I am glad this question was asked. I am running the SMC kit also, and have been thinking about what to do for next autox season. I have come up with 3 choices:

1. Remove it all together and just run, it is the cheapest choice but I think I might miss the power.
2. Run water (which is legal) instead of alky, I would need to change the jet and get retuned for water (already have an alky and non alky map). Some of the power would be back but not all, would this be the best compromise??
3. Be able to switch the alky off and run a non alky tune when autoxing. This is by far the most complicated and possible expensive choice. It would be easier if there was an easy way to switch boost settings and tune the cheap ways to switch tunes (ecuflash) do not control the boost and if you are running an mbc adjusting everytime you autox could be annoying.

I am hoping the the COBB accessport comes out soon as it is supposed to be able to control the boost as well as allow easy flashing of the ECU. I think with that I would choose #3 and just set up a switch to turn the alky off when i autox but allow me to run it on the street and when I do track events. Any other thoughts or comments?
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 02:48 PM
  #13  
rburris28's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: Western North Carolina
Originally Posted by SlowCar
sorri about the quick math

1GPH = 63cc/min
Ah! There's the conversion factor; I just missed it!
Reply
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 07:20 AM
  #14  
fixem2's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
From: USA
bullfrg, turning off the SMC should be easy, just remove the power line and/or fuse. Then you could turn the SMC kit off and run a low boost, no alky tune.
Reply
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 07:28 AM
  #15  
bullfrg's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (42)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 922
Likes: 0
From: Idaho
To make it even easier I was thinking of installing a little switch. Really the only issue is changing maps and boost, want to be able to change both, as changing the mbc all the time might be a pain in the butt.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:21 PM.