.

 

Moved to the proper section.

And Peter, remember to watch the personal attacks and insults because they surely aren't warranted.

 

Right, I'm a "wannabe". That's worth a laugh today. I'm sure the readership on this forum that are following and are up-to-date with where I'm at on my methanol injection system will get a good laugh, too.

This "debate" continues because there appears to be very little, empirical (posted) data on the side of water injection, with respect to this forum and our rotary community in general, that can substantiate the wild claims you've made. Given the credibility of others that've experimented with this over time, I have no doubt that there's some measurable amount of engine durability and reliability that's yielded by way of WI (within certain parameters of deliverability). However, based on not only 5 years of research done in a different community, but also based on my own experience and Howard's (that, I'll add, mirrors that other community's results nearly exactly, oddly enough), is seems to me that where the rubber meets the road is where methanol is. I see you are still arguing vociferously yet continuing to not provide any real data. If you'd just do this, then I'm sure the "debate" would at the very least simmer down a good degree if not cease entirely. I would think that as a vendor of a product that's designed to address these very issues that you'd put your best foot forward and post that data in an overwhelming fashion. But, the only thing I've seen is your reluctance to show flow rates as well as a single post from a 300-ish (?) horsepower run (yet you claim atleast 200-250hp more out of your setup).

Is there even just one person on this forum that's using your WI system with the same or marginally-close success that you've fervently yet unsubstantially claimed for the past several weeks? Anybody that can stand behind your claims with a real-world setup and some real-world data?

Peter, Is it reasonable to suggest that given its overall infancy and with something as wonderful as this (auxiliary injection) that we'd see wholly complete and thorough histories fn the development of this with respect to the gains made to the claimants' vehicles? I'm still waiting to see this from people on the WI side, especially when it comes to big power. I've got a 6-page blog up on TeamFC3S that shows my history from day 1 up to present day, and it shows the progress that I've made including all of the mistakes. I'm sitting at almost 26psi of boost on a 60-1HIFI on the stock top-mounted intercooler, running just barely over 50% of my overall injector capacity, with EGT's that are bone cold, for crying out loud, while I can flog the heck out of the car over and over and over again. The history is thorough and shows the overwhelming power and efficacy of methanol.

But, I'm sure it will be ignored because I'm just a "clown".

B

 

Brian, let the argument with Rice go. The AI section won't have the same childish behavior that is tolerated in the single turbo section. Thanks in advance.

Zach

 

I'm not taking pokes at him; I'm trying to force him to substantiate his claims. He's a product vendor. Many of his technical claims are just false and they're quite misleading to the readers of this section.

B

 

I got one thing to note that Rice Racing keeps saying water does not detonate right? Well how about the 93 Octane pump gas that you are using? You are only pushing it farther because of the colder inlet charge till the 93 starts to denate too. If I'm wrong about this, someone let me know. You can only pushed the 93 octane so far which BDC on the other hand is increasing the octane higher too.

Also on another note, didn't those turbocharged Indy car ran methanol with no intercoolers? So they used WI to cool the pressurized air coming out of the turbos which they ran like 40 psi+ if I remember correctly. Air heats up when you compress it. I'm not 100% sure about this but if I'm wrong too, let me know.

 

I have to agree.
This methanol vs water injection debate is never going to end. What everyone have to remember it's a debate and not a war of words.
With that said everyone have to substantiate their claims with some form of evidence mostly with actual personal results and not quotes from some other source.
The methanol and water/methanol users have allready shown results here. I have not seen any hard personal data from any of the 100% water users.
What everyone wants to acheive is more power with reliability. So with more results from different applications everyone gets to decide what is better suited for their use.
It's obvious that both sides have it's benefits and downfalls.
So please the advocates for 100% water injection please post some actual personal results so we all can have an intelligent discussion of your findings.

 

You really cannot compare water to methanol when it comes to detonating. Of course anything that burns will detonate. This whole discussion is based on using water and methanol as a suppliment to the main fuel used. If that were the case then Methanol would win hands down because you cannot use 100% water as a fuel. Both products offer advantages and disadvantages. What we need is to show the benefits and down falls of both so we all can decide what is better suited or needed for everyone's particular applications. Some people might need a cooler combustion and would gain from the results of cooling the intake charge even further. Others may benefit form higher octane with some cooling benefits that the other product offers. Even others might benfit more form a combination or certain % of both. What we really need to see is actual results with data to support each other findings. Just stating that one works better than the other based on what some engineer or race team found on an application that does not compare proves notting.

 

the newly created Auxiliary Injection section will move forward based on objective data only. this section will NOT be a catfight between water and alcohol.

each injectant has individual characteristics both plus and minus and each will be supported and analized on this forum.

there is no single best injectant for all rotary owners as many of us have differing objectives.

"claims" without supportive data relating to rotaries will be highly discouraged here as we are looking for the substantiated "facts."

highly discouraged... as in deleted.

as such, look for this thread to lose a few posts.

AI has great potential for turbocharged rotaries and we, the posters, have an obligation to help the community better understand the realities of AI and if we allow the section to degenerate into a bunch of XXXX the community will look elsewhere and miss a major opportunity.

howard coleman

 

I'm sitting at almost 26psi of boost on a 60-1HIFI on the stock top-mounted intercooler, running just barely over 50% of my overall injector capacity, with EGT's that are bone cold, for crying out loud, while I can flog the heck out of the car over and over and over again. The history is thorough and shows the overwhelming power and efficacy of methanol.

But, I'm sure it will be ignored because I'm just a "clown".


Brian with the statement you made above I find it very difficult to consider you as a 'clown'.
What I see is a person providing hard data to substantiate their claims. It might not be the best or the only proven combination but you're showing the results and findings of using methanol for your application.
Have you considered dynoing your combination to see what the results are based on horsepower gains? If anything that no one can't argue about would be your sucess with the use of the stock top mount I/C at the boost levels you're using. That alone shows the benefits of using Methanol for your application.
Keep up the good work.

 

Rice Racing,

Did you forget, those cars run Methanol as a fuel and not pump gas?

 

I dont think F1 cars run methanol if thats what you mean.

Scott

 

I said I'm a "clown" because Rice said I was.

I'd love to get it on the dyno. I've been making some noise about it the past week or so but it's just a matter of doing it. I botched the installation of my low-level sensor in the alcohol fuel cell so I'm waiting for a replacement gromet to fix it all and make it leak-free again. I'd love to get some numbers; I want to have some data on this turbo before I switch to another one. I'd also like some more figures like logged EGT's, too. Hopefully it'll happen soon.

B

 

When i get a IDC tracking kit i will do a full tune on water and post it up. I have done the hell out of the other 2 so i only got 2 left now :-0

Scott

 

I wasn't sure what they used. They don't use the regular ole 93 pump gas that's for sure. That's the point I was getting at.

 

LOL. Well im pretty sure you are right there. I'm sure there is somebody on here that will say other wise.

Scott

 

here's the numbers on a run i did today...


boost set at 1.3 bar or 19 psi ( my turbos make 84 pounds of air at that boost). i removed 6% additional fuel before the runs and based on my first run removed another 2% from 8 psi and up. I am down around 35-40% base fuel and replacing it w methanol under boost after 5.5 psi.


17.3-----------17.6-----------17.5-----------18.0---------18.0-------18.48 ------ boost

10.6-----------11.1-----------10.9-----------10.4---------10.3---------9.8----- AFR

16-------------21-------------17------------8-------------3--------------2-----PowerFC Knock

1125--------1117------------1179-------1190----------1201-------1234---Pre turbo EGT f

51-------------60--------------65----------71-------------81-----------86 Inj Duty850/1600

57------------59-------------56----------56-------------58-----------58------—Fuel Pressure

15-----------------------------------------------------------------Lead Ignition w 11degrees of split

4.2---------4.57---------------------------------------------------------------------------------TPS

57--------------------------------------------------------------- degrees F pre meth air temp

so what can we take from the latest methanol metrics?

I am running my 850/1600 (4900 cc/minute) base fuel injectors close to flat out at 86% duty cycle and an injecting another 1200 cc/minute of methanol and am making more than 600 rwhp according to Dynologlab…. (dyno Friday)

Do you see any knock?

Do you see any high EGTs?

Admittedly, my twin TO4 setup is different than the typical GT42 that makes its 80 plus pounds of air at 29+ psi. mine makes 84 pounds at 17+ psi. the same stress is in the motor in the form of produced torque however and torque is what really creates knock and high egts that warp apex seals.

Brian is running 25+ psi w his alcohol setup and, while he is currently running smaller sized air delivery, is seeing similar (low) egts.

What’s it going to take to get my egts up and where do I stop leaning out base fuel and making more hp????

Stay tuned.


howard coleman

 

I recommend you revise your statements

I only deal in FACTS... I typed them MANY times over and over again in a thread that was deleted both on this site and yours.

The onus is on you to match or come close to anything I have achieved with water, not on me

Be it here in Aus or in Europe I have multiple 600bhp 13B rotaries running std pump fuel and water alone for well over 10 years.

honk honk

 

Here is some data for you all *again*

6 x cars
560 to 600bhp @ engine
12.8 to 13.7:1 AFR's if needed
Optimax pump fuel
350cc to 450cc per min water injection
Flat power from 5500rpm to 8500rpm
DP EGT 700deg C
*much lower water and oil temperatures on circuit racing track days*

Milage Covered
500 000+km combined testing
10+ years in service
multiple dyno competitions won (for pump fuel cars)
Proven in high endurance testing *top speed* runs and interstate races for up to 3+ hours continuios use.
Let me know what else you would like to know???

 

ok just so that maybe we can get this straight rice I think what people mean by data is either logs from standalones, or any other hard proof of your claims. I'm not saying you haven't done it but if I had a dollar for every keyboard racer or number crunching theorist out there (especially on this forum) I would be a millionaire.

 

For the last f*cking time.

Its not a claim (to the many) disrespectful internet wannabe's

Have you heard of VS Power? There is a forum member on here who has a WI data for his 13BT of an engine dyno (real proven power !) for those who care to stick their heads out of their own ****'s for at least one second, and open their eyes up to people who have the real experience in this area.

I dont need to list up some pittyfull toy type screen shots of a sub std ecu to show how good i am or to proove what I offer you for free is actualy true.

Why make a wheel when its already been invented? Water is the engineers choice, science & history and most importantly RESULTS has proven it over and over again for many many years.

Please tell me what you would like to know?

 

So, now the Haltech E6K is a "sub-standard ECU" and I'm merely posting those "pitiful toy type" screenshots just to "show how good I am".... I understand how this works with you, now. Forget my ceaseless attempts at objectivity and fair, meritorious argumentation by way of showing and demanding empirical data. Forget the substantive, posted #'s and the hardware combination. Forget the fuel combination used. Forget the 54% duty cycle at 25+psi of boost on 720/1680 combination which changes the entire paradigm of how we design our fuel systems. Forget the fact that what fortunate results I'm having are virtually unheard of and nearly unbelievable. Because it's not water, it's not worth looking at. Because RICE didn't do it or didn't have a hand in it, it's not worth considering. Because it's something RICE disagrees with, I'm just an "internet wannabe", a "clown", or any other number of colourful metaphors you'd like to throw out. How epitomizing.

http://forum.teamfc3s.org/showthread.php?t=50682&page=5

The "engineers' choice" (if that's even true in the first place and how on Earth would you even know that?) can be one thing, but both Howard and I can prove with data beyond any shred of doubt (over and over again and not just typing in random numbers on an Internet forum and making alleged claims) that methanol works beyond our wildest dreams. What can we say? Knowing what we know and have seen, why would we reject that? It's funny; it works with the exact same results as what the vast number of Buick guys are running into consistently, time and time again, without fail. "History" of those guys over the past 5-6 years started at water, then went to water/alcohol 50/50 mix, then eventuated in alcohol only. I guess that same "history" of theirs is wrong because you don't agree with it and because it doesn't help corroborate the claims of your WI product you're trying to brazenly push here... right?

By the way, I searched on Google earlier and read that Shell Optimax is 98 octane which is very close to unleaded race fuel. Aside from any detergent or oxygenate differences, that's a big difference between that and our (US) 93 octane. I'd venture to say the power you're achieving, if you really are in the first place although I've yet to see a single person respond anywhere on this forum that's using your system, is more than likely due to the higher quality fuel you're working atop of rather than something being done by water.

B

 

Hi guys, dont want to get involved in this argument, but just thought id point out that the octane ratings are calculated differently for europe/US (not sure bout aus but guessing same as europe from whats been said), optimax is a pump gas, albeit the best version. Cant remember exct differences but if you do a search it will show you somewhere, japs have it best, there pump is at least 100

 

YOur very limited knowledge is again openly on display but your mate moderator hopefully will edit your short coming by the morning

DO you know what RON and MON is Brian??? I dont think so, go google it LOL.

As a reminder I drive a Mazda Rotary not a Buick

All my data ( a plethora of it) is from rotaries, not copied from somebody else in another type of car, oh and its my own it spans a greater length of time than your ever beloveded Buicks you seem to always quote as well

Please come talk to me wheh you have an engine dyno result and not a very shonky screen dump of a your ECU then maybe come again with your own *wealth of practical knowledge* when you amased 1/100th of the data I have over the years that I have been doing this *mate*

These are not claims mate, like I said I will show you and anyone up who keeps on with rubbish quotes againts WI be they flippent or otherwise, learn to pay some respect and you might just get some in return

I take great offence to anyone saying stupid things about WI let alone them saying one word I mention on the subject is about personal gain or anything else ! Now I wont tollerate that nor will I tollerate stupidity on this topic or mis information (which you have been more than guilty of spreading BTW).

Water Injection enhances power
Water Injection is safe, inexpensive to run, and reduces peak stresses in your engine
Water Injection has a mass of data across so many fields and engine types

Please, waiting for another *expert* to say I am dreaming on this topic.


What would you like to know bout WI on rotaries, please ask me I will tell you all you need to know and I will guarrantee you 100% reliability and more power than any other option for pump fuel + give you the BEST ENGINEERING SOLUTION

Lets get to the bottom of it *if you have any intention of doing so* I highly doubt it though since I have shown you up anytime you have opened your mouth via your keyboard

 

Like to see some proper AFR settings on your tests.

* Can you match near stoich operation or normal levels of excess fuel ratio's?
* Will the engine survive the above? (have you tested it???) I have with WI
* How do we do a 3hr interstate trip on full noise? What size tank (again have you done any endurance testing?)
* How do we stop detonation without excessive rich base fuel or meth enrichment since metha is prone to pre ignition

^ Please address above points if you would like to have some type of discussion with me on it.

WI I have no such problems and they have all been proven over time on rotaries

Again offer is there for anyone to learn about WI if your interested in its proven abilities, and not simply in having a pissing match cause its not what you have or are thinking of running for whatever reasons