Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have run the snow performance nitro Meth in my system, its basically like a small Nos shot when the system comes on, instant power increase.

mine starts injecting at 8psi and full flow at 25psi, you get the initial surge as it comes on boost and then a second surge shortly after when the wmi/nitro meth kicks in.

I have run the snow performance nitro Meth in my system, its basically like a small Nos shot when the system comes on, instant power increase.

mine starts injecting at 8psi and full flow at 25psi, you get the initial surge as it comes on boost and then a second surge shortly after when the wmi/nitro meth kicks in.

I have been running a coolingmist stage 1 kit in my hilux with the controller added in now and wideband aem a/f (3.4l v6 trd supercharger) for ages now. Ive tried running water, water/meth, meth back to back and its all good in a nutshell. Water actually removes more heat than meth but meth gets rid of heat faster. I'm super interested in trying nitro in small quanities but still have a lot to learn about using more and more meth. I have found more and more meth (bigger injector and now trying 80/20 mix) just seems to keep adding in hp. I picked up 30hp just from adding in the original kit with the boost switch only. Its awesome stuff. Methanol is easy for me to come by but for the guys starting out the 50/50 mix is great. My bro bought the basic kit to add onto his car as a safety buffer zone for the track only.

Check out this link for a brief overview of water/meth systems. Its a bit cheesy but its pretty simple and makes perfect sense.

You guys could have used it a few pages back by the looks of it.

Bit of experience with these kits tells me that the coolingmist ones seem to be the best with aquamist a close second (coolingmist has a better controller IMO mapping from not only boost but can use 0-5v from afm if you still have one). Devils own/AEM ok but $$$ not as good as the first two and snow kits are probably better left alone.

^ that video is a nice basic explanation.

Im of a differing opinion about which kit is better though. From what I have read coolingmist kits are a close second to the aquamist kits, but the aquamist seem a little more difficult to set up.

Has anyone run and aquamist or coolingmist kit in a skyline?

I would think a kit that uses boost to trigger injection would be marginally easier to install than one that runs off of IDC or maf voltage.

The more features you get with the WMI kit you buy, will probably make it slightly more hassle to install.

Jet_r31, do you use a coolingmist kit? Are they of reasonable quality in your opinion and have you used/installed any other kits that you can compare them to?

Edited by Mitcho_7

So ive been doing a little research on evolutionM forums and it appears the biggest worry is getting even cylinder distribution so a lot of people run multiple jets to feed each cylinder.

Which brings me to a query, I'm running a plazmaman forward facing plenum and was going to just set up a progressive system with the jet ~8-10 cm from the TB.

Do you think this would cause uneven flow with a ffp? I'm a little concerned that cylinders 1-3 will end up getting all the mist and 4-6 will "starve" if that makes sense.

Idealy I should probably have a jet in each runner but room is pretty tight and IMO its creating more potential for failure points with multiple nozzles and tees for the feed lines etc.

Thoughts?????

Absolutely anything could happen. From what you thought might, to the complete opposite.

If you want the best distribution, move the nozzle further upstream. Even then, you are at the whim of what the water droplets want to do as they go past the (angled, unless at WOT) throttle plate and then through the plenum.

So, correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying move the nozzle further away from teh TB to give the mist a chance to turn to a gas before it enters the plenum?

Mmmmmm, could work. I'm still Seeing cyl 1 getting more of the mix than cyl 6.

I wonder if say 3 nozzles tapped into the side of plenum itself would help with even distribution ?

That's pretty much what I'm saying. A little more time for a larger proportion of the drops to vapourise, a ltitle more time for them to bounce around and come close to occupying the whole cross section of the pipe (You can no doubt imagine that the cone shaped spray from any nozzle is going to push more drops toward the other side of the pipe if there is enough drop velocity, or if there is no enough drop velocity, then drops won't penetrate more than half way across - therefore you need time for the them to tumble around in the turbulence downstream and spread out.)

3 nozzles in the plenum could work really well....or not. Without decent modelling or testing, there's just no way to know where the water is going to go.

Great, looks like I'll have to go and do a fluid dynamics degree just to figure out where to put my WMI jets.....lol

The evo boys love the stuff, especially in the US. Some of thier setups are very complicated with foolproof failsafes, map switching etc etc.

Unfortunately those of us with teh trusty PFC are pretty much limited to a boost cut type failsafe that will switch to running on actuator pressure.

I'll keep researching and see if can work out something skyline specific.

Would be good if u could angle the jet to spray with the flow of air to help vboid what gtsboy was saying.

But Dave i think u are over thinking it. Many people run with a single nozzle system before throttle body without issue's.

Has anyone seen any motor failures due too unever distribution?

Would be good if u could angle the jet to spray with the flow of air to help vboid what gtsboy was saying.

But Dave i think u are over thinking it. Many people run with a single nozzle system before throttle body without issue's.

Has anyone seen any motor failures due too unever distribution?

Yeah a little right angled jet pointed at the tb would be good, pretty sure it wouldn't effect the air flow in pipes too much.

You could be right though Jez, I may be over thinking it. I suppose if the plazmaman flows ok in it's current state the. It's just going to take any gas from the meth with it and still flows as it should than things should reach number 6 ok.

I suppose that with the stock intake WMI doesn't starve 1 & 6 so probably the same deal???

You'd have to assume that when tuning with uneven distribution, you end up tuning to the cylinder that's getting the least water.

I think this comment makes a lot of sense.

If you listening for knock and you are getting slightly uneven distribution, then the cylinder that isn't getting as much injected into it will ping before the others. As soon as you can hear the engine ping, back the timing off for safety and there shouldn't be any problems.

Having said that, I'm not an expert by any stretch. Most people seem to have no dramas with just one nozzle though... I think like it was mentioned it would be less of a problem with the stock intake on a rb25 compared with a forward facing plenum.

Edited by Mitcho_7

That's what I was thinking Mitcho. On the stock plenum the mist will flow into the middle and "spread" out.

What concerns me with the plazmaman is the most will have to pass over 1,2,3,4,5 to reach number 6.

But as Jez said I think I'm over thinking the whole thing.

Should just connect up the kit and see what happens :)

Has anyone here DIY'd a kit?

Looking at the basic cooling mist stage 1 kit which is just a pump, nozzle, lines and boost switch. Put this together with a "5th injector" style driver running off an injector signal along with a PWM solenoid and presto a fuel proportional WMI kit for under $400 that doesn't use duty cycle to the pump to regulate itself.

Has anyone tried this with success?

Where can you source a solenoid that can be PWM'd and is compatible with water and methanol?

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AEM-WATER-METHANOL-INJECTION-KIT-1-GALLON-TANK-30-3000-/360458308794?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item53ecfd4cba

this looks like a good kit, comes with nice metal fittings/nozzles and afew safety features too

will prob get this in the near future once i finalise my mods and ready for finaly tune.

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

    • 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.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...