Turbo fever (aquamist) - water injection idea

[Dave Glubrecht]

I had a friend do this to his "built" dorF 460 and had mounmted the resivoir
on the core support and a little too high.  One evening he parked on a hill
...   Water is uncompressable...   Damage was limited to #8 rod.
    Dave G


----- Original Message -----
From: "Livolsi, Stephane" <Stephane.Livolsi at investorsgroup.com>
To: "Audi Quattro List" <quattro at audifans.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 12:59 PM
Subject: FW: Turbo fever (aquamist) - water injection idea


> In my early automotive years, I was partial to Ford 302 ci V8's of 60's
and
> 70's vintage - very basic carburated engines which were very easy to work
> with.  I remember investigating water injection systems at that time and
> deciding that the 'manufacturers' of such systems wanted waaaay toooo much
> money and I designed my own.
> Very simple, actually, I teed an intake manifold vacuum line and ran the
> extra line to a second windshield washer bottle that I mounted in the
engine
> compartment.  Closed off the end of the line with a screw inserted snugly
> into the end of the line.  Now I could adjust the flow by screwing it in
> more or less.  Drop the line in the tank and if the engine starts
> sputtering, it's getting too much water so turn the screw a couple more
> turns.  Basically through trial and error I would find a spot where the
> engine ran well at idle with the hose in the water.  Then a bit of driving
> would confirm the water level was dropping (sometimes rapidly)
>
> This was a very unscientific experiment with no hard numbers measuring
> before and after performance, but during a subsequent rebuild of the heads
> on that engine, I can tell you that those were some of the cleanest
> combustion chambers I have ever, ever seen on any engine.  Seem to recall
> there was a noticeable improvement in fuel economy too.
>
> I was pondering messing with this on my 5ktq until reality slapped me in
the
> face - there is no vacuum to suck up the water in the turbo engine - it
> would probably just blow bubbles in the water tank.  Those of you with NA
> Audi's may want to give this a try.
>
> Stephane
>
> > ----------
> > From: Jenny Curtis[SMTP:jenny at physics.umn.edu]
> > Sent: August 7, 2002 6:55 AM
> > To: qlist
> > Subject: Re: Turbo fever (aquamist)
> >
> > --
> > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> > Bernard Littau wrote:
> >
> > >[snip]
> > >
> > >>The Ur-Q has turbo-saver (it
> > >>looks like a nitrous bottle, but it hooks into a pre-water cooled
turbo
> > >>to keep it from burning up).  Now aquamist claims to provide cooling
> > >>protection as well as performance gains.  Has anyone used these
systems?
> > >>The HP gains claimed for the 900 seemed unbelievably big, almost
double
> > >>what a tuned 900 like Graham's gets.  Could they really be all that?
> > >>
> > >[snip]
> > >
> > >I've read the first sentence, above, a few times now.  At first I
thought
> > >the turbo-saver was some kind of pre-turbo cold side water injection.
> > Now I
> > >am thinking the "nitrous bottle" is an oil reservoir that slowly
delivers
> > >the oil back through the turbo after the engine is shut down, to help
> > cool
> > >the turbo.
> > >
> > Right, the turbo saver, is meant to prevent your turbo from cooking
> > after shut-down, which is the number one cause of failure in pre-water
> > cooled turbos.  It's not a performance mod, at all.  I guess I was
> > mistaken in thinking that water injection would also have a safety
> > benefit for older turbos.  It sounds like there is a pretty clear
> > consensus on the list that it doesn't.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >A good rule is: Unbelievable claims usually are :-)  Adding a turbo can
> > >generally double the HP of most engines.  (NA 10V I5 is what?, 135 HP;
> > stock
> > >MC is 168 HP; tuned MC is 275 HP)  Doubling a tuned turbo, which is
what
> > I
> > >assume was being claimed for the 900, would be difficult to do in a
> > reliable
> > >manner. (A 550 HP MC??? :-)
> > >
> > The 900T tuned gets around 175 HP, the guy was claiming his got 325,
> > nearly double.  I was very doubtful.
> >
> > Gary wrote:
> >
> > 3. The cooling effect of the water makes the fuel "look" higher in
octane
> > than it really is as it makes the combustion chamber cooler. It makes
> > lower
> > octane fuel burn like higher octane fuel as the vaporization of the
water
> > absorbs a huge amount of heat.  Increasing the ratio of alc to h2o
beyond
> > 50% will increase the octane, but it adds more heat, which I've
concluded
> > I
> > don't want.  50-50 is I'm told the magic ratio...
> >
> >
> > He was running his right off the wiper fluid resevoir, and it seemed to
> > actually work running on window cleaner.  He didn't say whether he'd
> > upped the alcohol content of his wiper fluid.  I've considered doing
> > this in Minnesota anyway, since there's nothing worse than having the
> > stuff freeze on your windshield on a very cold morning.
> >
> > Jenny
> > --
> >
>