Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...

OK, thread raised from the dead.........I made 301.5rwkw today on a DD dyno.

I drove it around without a tune [that used the WMI] like forever...............it wasn't knocking and the car was making good power etc and I am a bloody busy bugger!!!

But I finally made the time and had it tuned. Run before tune made 270rwkw, then we kept adding timing and pulling fuel out until we had a good overall balance and got 300 on 16psi for the final run. I probably could have got more if I wanted to up the boost to say 18-20psi, but considering my motor is not built, I didn't think it was worth the risk.

I'll scan the plots and post soon.

Apologies to all who were waiting for this, I just couldn't get to it any sooner.

Well there is 10% more power, and I know that the curve is fatter in all area's, and seat of the arse says it definitely feels quicker all round, but that can be considered as being all pretty subjective - by some. Honestly making more power was a bonus, I really wanted fuel taken out [it was riched up to counter bad knock levels = the reason I went WMI]- so a better tune.

WMI is really just a band-aid for ineffective or insufficient cooling :/

Your fixing the symptom not the problem, but if it works it works.

I considered it but decided against it for the reasons above.

Happy hunting.:banana:

What problems have you encountered so far with the wmi system....if any?

I have a brand new kit tucked away........somewhere...hmmmm :unsure:

None, love it, works faultlessly.

And no its not for inefficient cooling alone, it is for too high a compression, low fuel octane, and an extra 30rwkw. Where I experienced knock had nothing to do with overheating. However having said that, the heat and burn rate inside the combustion chamber was likely not as controlled as it should have been. But when you are ramming more of everything into it [fuel, boost etc] then it is to be expected at some point. There are other solutions to solve it [E85, lower compression pistons /thicker gasket, smaller turbo etc], but I chose WMI

Dyno charts attached.

post-5748-0-54007800-1302833032_thumb.jpg

post-5748-0-15885800-1302833232_thumb.jpg

  • 8 months later...

Hey Trident,

Reviving your thread for some quick info

Im about to get my SRDE+T on the rollers and am considering a WMI kitup for myself, however I am thinking about it on a boost fed pre turbo arrangement with a very fine low pressure atomiser

Can you tell me the relative water use of your system? And can you tell me did you need to run dual maps to run with/without or was your tuner able to simple have a boost down area of the map and boost up area which needs the WMI?

I was hoping I could tune to the pre 12psi region without WMI and then the tuner goes hard from 12psi to whatever he can get using distilled water alone

It would be good to hear your thoughts having done it yourself :thumbsup:

my WMI setup turns on at 8 psi and goes to full flow at full boost, having a 9.5L water meth tank in the boot i find i only have to top it up once every 6 months - 1 year

though that will increase if you are the kind of person that gets right into it every time its driven.

the smaller tanks just check the level when you fill up or once a month if you arent a flat footed user (alternatively install a float switch into the tank to turn on a low level light on your dash when the tank gets down to 1/3-1/4 left)

if your WMI setup supports map based turn on/off, set it to come on at 12psi or a little before and then full at your target boost, that way the WMI isnt active below that point and there is no chance the tuner will go all out relying on the WMI to keep it safe below that point, alternatively if your ecu supports it, get the tuner to setup two iginition maps and have a switch between them, one tuned without the WMI and one with it, (you could even set the switch to turn the wmi system off and on as switched)

unfortunately my car is running a microtech, I am on the 'buy a house' budget now and cant afford to change it again

my thought is to have an airtight tank under bonnet with a barb on the top and a barb on the bottom

top barb has a check valve and a ball and spring like a turbo tech to regulate when boost can pressurize the tank, bottom barb runs direct to the atomiser which i will mount into the suction pipe on the turbo.

as the system hits target boost pressure the turbotech will open and push the water through the bottom side of the tank spraying its mist into the non boosted intake stream

thus the dual map idea isnt going to work too well unless i am manually switching... plus i dont think the microguess has dual map capability (i am surprised it can window in and out....)

good to know it doesnt consume it too quickly, I would probably end up with a 5 or 6L underbonnet tank if i was to go ahead with it and just want to know it will last atleast a week of heavy driving or atleast one full track day.

fair enough.. Im still in consideration stage at the moment.

the setup is a .86 28RS on an internally standard SR 10:1cr, im wondering now if the WMI will help me go beyond the compressors usual envelope or if it will just get me there more comfortably

being able to fill up anywhere and just keep going has been a priority to me in the past, it shouldnt change but i do have the power bug afterall.

Pre-compressor induction of the water spray is a different sort of science. And wait for the comments about wearing out impellers etc. It is apparent that you have to do it right, but it will work.

Sizing your nozzle correctly should yield a water:fuel ratio of somewhere around 15-20%

Some setups work better than others, and there are a couple of forums about dedicated to WI. Great pictures, and more than a few variations that will give you an idea of what you want.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...