Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
#11
Re: Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
Originally Posted by WTF
how gay is it to keep the tank filled?
#12
Re: Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
if you use a hobbs switch so you only spray when you are making a certain PSI will help save fluid.
if you run 25-30psi i wouldnt use the water injection at say less than 12-14psi, you already know you are safe with 15psi so you dont need it then
if you run 25-30psi i wouldnt use the water injection at say less than 12-14psi, you already know you are safe with 15psi so you dont need it then
#13
Re: Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
I was actually going to use a hobbs switch and start spraying at around 10-12 psi. I'm still not quite sure exactly how much boost I will be running at this point. It could be anywhere from 18-30. Most likely it will be 20-22. if this is the case, I'm going to start spraying at around 8-10 I know that the motor will be ok without the water injection until about 15 or so, but I still would feel safer with it spraying at a lower psi. Especially if I'm tracking it at a road course. Then I know it's not going to melt anything.
this is the kit I'm looking at:
http://www.coolingmist.com/detailmain.aspx?pid=Cool150
OOOO and it's on sale as of today too! only thing I'd need is a tank as this will be in the trunk. A one gallon gas can or the like would work easily enough...
this is the kit I'm looking at:
http://www.coolingmist.com/detailmain.aspx?pid=Cool150
OOOO and it's on sale as of today too! only thing I'd need is a tank as this will be in the trunk. A one gallon gas can or the like would work easily enough...
#15
Re: Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
Originally Posted by 02vortec
do both.
i do.
im rearmounted as well.
i do.
im rearmounted as well.
Sorry, I have quite a few questions for you...
#16
Re: Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
Scott already knows my opinion as I'm the one pushing water injection for this setup. I think with as hot as the turbo gets in addition to the long piping, the mist will do a very effective job at cooling, especially when mounted about 6" from the outlet of the turbo.
I have the same kind of car (1995 SHO), but I run a supercharger and a Coolingmist 2-stage water injection kit. My first stage (very small nozzle) starts injecting at about 3 PSI and the second at 7-9. I was running about 10 PSI at about 381whp. I abused the car on the street, the canyons and on road courses and never had a problem with breaking the cast pistons. With my new build, similar to Scott's, I'll be running about 14-15 PSI on forged pistons and a larger bore. I'll be using bigger nozzles and possibly upgrade from the 100 PSI to the 150 PSI pump, in addition, I have an accumulator to keep the flow smooth. I've been very happy with water injection.
I tracked on the road course and entire day and never used a complete tank of water. I use my stock washer fluid bottle which is less than a gallon, and I use washer fluid in the winter and distilled water in the summer.
I do think that if he were to put an intercooler, it would make it more complex to add more lag to a system that already has more than average lag. Nothing against an intercooler or aftercooler, but with experience with these cars, I forsee WI being plenty, especially wiith a built motor and the tuning I did, he was able to hit fairly high boost on a stock motor and not additional charge cooling aside from the really long charge pipe.
I have the same kind of car (1995 SHO), but I run a supercharger and a Coolingmist 2-stage water injection kit. My first stage (very small nozzle) starts injecting at about 3 PSI and the second at 7-9. I was running about 10 PSI at about 381whp. I abused the car on the street, the canyons and on road courses and never had a problem with breaking the cast pistons. With my new build, similar to Scott's, I'll be running about 14-15 PSI on forged pistons and a larger bore. I'll be using bigger nozzles and possibly upgrade from the 100 PSI to the 150 PSI pump, in addition, I have an accumulator to keep the flow smooth. I've been very happy with water injection.
I tracked on the road course and entire day and never used a complete tank of water. I use my stock washer fluid bottle which is less than a gallon, and I use washer fluid in the winter and distilled water in the summer.
I do think that if he were to put an intercooler, it would make it more complex to add more lag to a system that already has more than average lag. Nothing against an intercooler or aftercooler, but with experience with these cars, I forsee WI being plenty, especially wiith a built motor and the tuning I did, he was able to hit fairly high boost on a stock motor and not additional charge cooling aside from the really long charge pipe.
#17
Re: Water injection or Intercooler for remote turbo setup?
Anyone worried about the whole "keeping the tank filled" bullshit sucks. I drove my turbo Saturn from Michigan to California on less than a gallon of smurf ****. That included boosting through most of the mountains, which was most of I-80 through Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California. You will pop the hood more often to check your oil, boost clamps, and vac lines than to fill the alcohol resevoir.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
willahlborn
Forced Induction
1
10-24-2003 04:02 PM