DIY Water/Meth Injection
Apr 2, 2012, 11:57 AM
#34
Evolving Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Gettysburg, PA
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OT: I have always wondered about making a system like this, even though the DIY I found used a little less "Ghetto" parts. But great job! I would like to see some hard proof evidence though
Apr 2, 2012, 01:03 PM
#36
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking forward for Wednesday this are the tests I am going to make (video and times) at the 1/4 mile. I hope I do my best on each run.
Revving @3.5-3.8k rpms
Shifting @6.2-6.5k rpms
1. As I have it now no injection
2. As I have it now w/ injection (need to remove all water and alcohol from my wiper fluid and make a 50 50% vol w/m)
3. Moving the Maf before the injector w/injection
And for the final show... crazy alcohol injection (whatever is left on the fluid tank filled to top with 70% ethylic alcohol)
Hoping best results.
If anyone sees this, I got better times in dynolicious when shifting @6K than further @6.8K+ rpms ???? hahaha
Revving @3.5-3.8k rpms
Shifting @6.2-6.5k rpms
1. As I have it now no injection
2. As I have it now w/ injection (need to remove all water and alcohol from my wiper fluid and make a 50 50% vol w/m)
3. Moving the Maf before the injector w/injection
And for the final show... crazy alcohol injection (whatever is left on the fluid tank filled to top with 70% ethylic alcohol)
Hoping best results.
If anyone sees this, I got better times in dynolicious when shifting @6K than further @6.8K+ rpms ???? hahaha
Apr 2, 2012, 01:49 PM
#37
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sherbrooke, QC
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've realised this soon enough, but the sound with my AEM cold air intake past the 6k mark is amaking. It sounds beastly and all angry, shouting at you! I love it!
Apr 2, 2012, 02:17 PM
#38
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The stock tune runs out of breath quickly, you need a retune to reduce the power loss that happens past the 6k rpm mark.
I've realised this soon enough, but the sound with my AEM cold air intake past the 6k mark is amaking. It sounds beastly and all angry, shouting at you! I love it!
I've realised this soon enough, but the sound with my AEM cold air intake past the 6k mark is amaking. It sounds beastly and all angry, shouting at you! I love it!
You have a retune? did you go for RRM piggyback or reflashed ecu?
Apr 2, 2012, 10:55 PM
#39
Oh my..this is great!! I love seeing stuff like this. My coworkers and family constantly criticize me for dreaming up strange things like "leafblower superchargers" (look it up on youtube, it actually works) and "Hyabusa powered Smart FourTwo's (ahem,...ya also on youtube lol) If it werent for the fact that A. my car still has a loan, and B. there aint room under the hood to mount a leafblower youd see a howto from me on how to bolt a Ryobi to your 4g69 and gain some ponies,. Ahh but I digress, they are but dreams to me to invent such crazy things. But alas! we have the few and lucky who find the means to show us the way!! BRAVO OL BOY! BRAVO INDEED!!
(The preceeding satement was not made by anyone from England only meant to impersonate them. EvoM is not responsible for content, views and opinions)
Just playin mods, please dont beat me with the ban stick.
(The preceeding satement was not made by anyone from England only meant to impersonate them. EvoM is not responsible for content, views and opinions)
Just playin mods, please dont beat me with the ban stick.
Apr 3, 2012, 05:51 AM
#41
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh my..this is great!! I love seeing stuff like this. My coworkers and family constantly criticize me for dreaming up strange things like "leafblower superchargers" (look it up on youtube, it actually works) and "Hyabusa powered Smart FourTwo's (ahem,...ya also on youtube lol) If it werent for the fact that A. my car still has a loan, and B. there aint room under the hood to mount a leafblower youd see a howto from me on how to bolt a Ryobi to your 4g69 and gain some ponies,. Ahh but I digress, they are but dreams to me to invent such crazy things. But alas! we have the few and lucky who find the means to show us the way!! BRAVO OL BOY! BRAVO INDEED!!
(The preceeding satement was not made by anyone from England only meant to impersonate them. EvoM is not responsible for content, views and opinions)
Just playin mods, please dont beat me with the ban stick.
(The preceeding satement was not made by anyone from England only meant to impersonate them. EvoM is not responsible for content, views and opinions)
Just playin mods, please dont beat me with the ban stick.
If you ever try to do the blower, don't waste time trying to adapt a electric blower, I would go for the gasoline one AND remember, 2nd law of thermodynamics is very clear, you can't expect to gain more power from nowhere, expect at most to have about 50 60% gain in your engine power based on the power of the blower.. got a 2 hp blower, then you may get 1 hp from it.. no more and thats sad
Apr 3, 2012, 03:15 PM
#42
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sherbrooke, QC
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand you.. hahaha making some calculations and being completely scientific about it (doesn´t happen on real life) you can actually pull out several 3'' intakes out of your car with the inlet pointing towards the front, and with about 10 intakes joining to only one you may gain about 5 psi of pressure to the intake at WOT and at 60 mph.. crazy, but not impossible.. until someone does that and test it having no good results at all, then I shall sleep calm hahaha.
It's already been done, and on several types of cars. It's called a ram-air.
This is a Pontiac Grand Am with it :
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_...0035_large.jpg
It makes a 5hp difference with the non ram-air Grand Am.
Apr 3, 2012, 03:36 PM
#43
Evolved Member
iTrader: (42)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: St. Charles, IL
Posts: 2,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand you.. hahaha making some calculations and being completely scientific about it (doesn´t happen on real life) you can actually pull out several 3'' intakes out of your car with the inlet pointing towards the front, and with about 10 intakes joining to only one you may gain about 5 psi of pressure to the intake at WOT and at 60 mph.. crazy, but not impossible.. until someone does that and test it having no good results at all, then I shall sleep calm hahaha.
(10) 3" intakes and 5psi at 60mph. C'mon. You are pulling numbers out of left field now.
Apr 3, 2012, 05:26 PM
#44
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I converted everything to metric
3" = 7.62cm
Area = Pi*7.62*7.62/4 = 45.6 cm2
Volumetric flux @100kph = Velocity*Area = 100kph*1000m/km*100cm/m /3600 s/h * 45.6cm2 = 126,666 cc/s of air crossing each tube
cc = cm3
engine side .. lets say at 100 kph you are at 2nd gear and 4500 rpm?
2.4L = 2400cc / 4 cyl = 600cc/cyl and 2 intakes per rpm = 1200cc/s you need to get at WOT to get a 100 efficient volume inside the combustion chamber.
1200cc/ rev = volume needed per revolution of crankshaft.. converting per second
4500 rev/ min = 75 rev / s
1200 cc/ rev * 75 rev / s revs go out and you get 90,000 cc/s to fulfill volume necesities.
back to the intakes you provide 126,666 per tube, and you got 10 so
1,266,666 cc/s flowing at forced rate, but you need only 90,000cc/s so
1,176,666 cc/s extras flowing. that means almost 11 times more volume flux pushing through the engine
reality-
we know air isn't an uncompressible fluid, the actual force of this volume pushing against another wall of air will not do the trick
10 tubes full of air trying to get inside just 1 means flux 10 times bigger and
air can't be drawn nor injected faster than sound velocity
volumetric efficiency of a 4 valve engine goes around 85% so this takes 15% of the available air out.
valve aperture is variable and it isn't open during a second, meaning less volume of air is capable of entering the combustion chamber.
fluid mechanics state that every single joint on 2 tubes to each other will have a pressure fall, I won't spend so much time calculating that
hahaha need darcy coefficents and reynolds number and so much more. (I did those on school and they are a pain in the.. did twice no more haha)conclusion
that's why I stated that theorically this is possible, but in reality I haven't seen anybody try to do this..
about the Ram Air, yes I know ram airs, but ram air is just 1 conic aperture, I wanted to test 10.
If you see closely 1 ram air entering the engine will fullfill the necessities of our car injecting 126,666cc/s when we need only 90,000 cc/s and when the combustion chamber isn't subjected to a vacuum force (wot indeed but need to consider flow restriction like valve angles, runners, etc) then your engine is not using power to draw air. its not a 5hp gain, its a 5hp loss relief to the engine.. our engines are capable of doing more and more hps, removing cats, adding piping and all of that just removes work needed to draw air and thus giving more hp.
Boltz, you may consider this silly, but it's what numbers on a paper gave me, using real and theorical numbers.. I didn't consider temperatures and all that stuff. Hope you are less exceptical than before that this could be possible
Apr 4, 2012, 06:04 AM
#45
Evolved Member
iTrader: (89)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, lets take out our calculators
I converted everything to metric
3" = 7.62cm
Area = Pi*7.62*7.62/4 = 45.6 cm2
Volumetric flux @100kph = Velocity*Area = 100kph*1000m/km*100cm/m /3600 s/h * 45.6cm2 = 126,666 cc/s of air crossing each tube
cc = cm3
engine side .. lets say at 100 kph you are at 2nd gear and 4500 rpm?
2.4L = 2400cc / 4 cyl = 600cc/cyl and 2 intakes per rpm = 1200cc/s you need to get at WOT to get a 100 efficient volume inside the combustion chamber.
1200cc/ rev = volume needed per revolution of crankshaft.. converting per second
4500 rev/ min = 75 rev / s
1200 cc/ rev * 75 rev / s revs go out and you get 90,000 cc/s to fulfill volume necesities.
back to the intakes you provide 126,666 per tube, and you got 10 so
1,266,666 cc/s flowing at forced rate, but you need only 90,000cc/s so
1,176,666 cc/s extras flowing. that means almost 11 times more volume flux pushing through the engine
reality-
we know air isn't an uncompressible fluid, the actual force of this volume pushing against another wall of air will not do the trick
10 tubes full of air trying to get inside just 1 means flux 10 times bigger and
air can't be drawn nor injected faster than sound velocity
volumetric efficiency of a 4 valve engine goes around 85% so this takes 15% of the available air out.
valve aperture is variable and it isn't open during a second, meaning less volume of air is capable of entering the combustion chamber.
fluid mechanics state that every single joint on 2 tubes to each other will have a pressure fall, I won't spend so much time calculating that hahaha need darcy coefficents and reynolds number and so much more. (I did those on school and they are a pain in the.. did twice no more haha)
conclusion
that's why I stated that theorically this is possible, but in reality I haven't seen anybody try to do this..
about the Ram Air, yes I know ram airs, but ram air is just 1 conic aperture, I wanted to test 10.
If you see closely 1 ram air entering the engine will fullfill the necessities of our car injecting 126,666cc/s when we need only 90,000 cc/s and when the combustion chamber isn't subjected to a vacuum force (wot indeed but need to consider flow restriction like valve angles, runners, etc) then your engine is not using power to draw air. its not a 5hp gain, its a 5hp loss relief to the engine.. our engines are capable of doing more and more hps, removing cats, adding piping and all of that just removes work needed to draw air and thus giving more hp.
Boltz, you may consider this silly, but it's what numbers on a paper gave me, using real and theorical numbers.. I didn't consider temperatures and all that stuff. Hope you are less exceptical than before that this could be possible
I converted everything to metric
3" = 7.62cm
Area = Pi*7.62*7.62/4 = 45.6 cm2
Volumetric flux @100kph = Velocity*Area = 100kph*1000m/km*100cm/m /3600 s/h * 45.6cm2 = 126,666 cc/s of air crossing each tube
cc = cm3
engine side .. lets say at 100 kph you are at 2nd gear and 4500 rpm?
2.4L = 2400cc / 4 cyl = 600cc/cyl and 2 intakes per rpm = 1200cc/s you need to get at WOT to get a 100 efficient volume inside the combustion chamber.
1200cc/ rev = volume needed per revolution of crankshaft.. converting per second
4500 rev/ min = 75 rev / s
1200 cc/ rev * 75 rev / s revs go out and you get 90,000 cc/s to fulfill volume necesities.
back to the intakes you provide 126,666 per tube, and you got 10 so
1,266,666 cc/s flowing at forced rate, but you need only 90,000cc/s so
1,176,666 cc/s extras flowing. that means almost 11 times more volume flux pushing through the engine
reality-
we know air isn't an uncompressible fluid, the actual force of this volume pushing against another wall of air will not do the trick
10 tubes full of air trying to get inside just 1 means flux 10 times bigger and
air can't be drawn nor injected faster than sound velocity
volumetric efficiency of a 4 valve engine goes around 85% so this takes 15% of the available air out.
valve aperture is variable and it isn't open during a second, meaning less volume of air is capable of entering the combustion chamber.
fluid mechanics state that every single joint on 2 tubes to each other will have a pressure fall, I won't spend so much time calculating that
hahaha need darcy coefficents and reynolds number and so much more. (I did those on school and they are a pain in the.. did twice no more haha)conclusion
that's why I stated that theorically this is possible, but in reality I haven't seen anybody try to do this..
about the Ram Air, yes I know ram airs, but ram air is just 1 conic aperture, I wanted to test 10.
If you see closely 1 ram air entering the engine will fullfill the necessities of our car injecting 126,666cc/s when we need only 90,000 cc/s and when the combustion chamber isn't subjected to a vacuum force (wot indeed but need to consider flow restriction like valve angles, runners, etc) then your engine is not using power to draw air. its not a 5hp gain, its a 5hp loss relief to the engine.. our engines are capable of doing more and more hps, removing cats, adding piping and all of that just removes work needed to draw air and thus giving more hp.
Boltz, you may consider this silly, but it's what numbers on a paper gave me, using real and theorical numbers.. I didn't consider temperatures and all that stuff. Hope you are less exceptical than before that this could be possible