My No Horse$hit Water Meth Dyno Experiment

[tothemax]

In my attempt to validate the claims that water/meth injection provides added power.. I did a little dyno experiment.

Unfortunately, the Left Coast Diesel dyno could not get the torque numbers so this result is based strictly on HP output.

I got these results with my 03 ALH w/ a RC6 tune, Colt stage 2 cam, ported head, 17/22 turbo, 11 mm pump, R520's nozzles and Devil's Own WMI 250 psi set up w/ a progressive boost controller set to start spraying at 15 psi and reach max spray at 25 psi.

I ran 25% methanol solution.

I did four runs

Run No.2 was with a D03 W/M nozzle and produced 216.89 HP and MAX EGT's of 1190

Run No.3 was with the w/m turned off and produced 214.76 HP and MAX EGT's of 1600

Run No.4 was with a D04 W/M nozzle and produced 216.48 HP and MAX EGT's of 1180

Run No.5 was with a no w/m and some ghetto NOS spraying in the airbox and produced 278.18 HP and MAX EGT's of 1400

Based on my no Horse$hit experiment, and with all other things beings equal, my conclusions are:

1- WMI has negligible effects on HP output

2- Significant beneficial effects on EGT's

3- My optimum nozzle size is D03. (why go with a larger nozzle if I get essentially the same cooling effects)

You make your own conclusions...

 

[Farfromovin]

Beautiful arcing curve!!! I think that speaks of Bill's head porting capabilities (and your Tuner's) for sure. Another benefit of water injection is significantly reduced peak cylinder pressures (and keeping internals a little cleaner hopefully). So, when does the NOS kit get installed LOL?

 

[tothemax]

Wait till I post the video of the guys at LCD ghetto spraying NOS straight in the airbox... I don't think I will go that route ... we did it just for fun.. .He said he could easily get 300 + if he sprayed it closer to the airbox because there was still a bunch of black smoke coming out.

I did not want to F/Up my car by spraying a bunch of NOS into it right now .... because right now it works absolutely perfect... pulls frickin hard... and I have a 2 day track event next weekend at Infineon which I can't wait..

Beautiful arcing curve!!! I think that speaks of Bill's head porting capabilities (and your Tuner's) for sure. Another benefit of water injection is significantly reduced peak cylinder pressures (and keeping internals a little cleaner hopefully). So, when does the NOS kit get installed LOL?

 

[nicklockard]

Above 85mph, the runs 2, 3, 4 have indistinguishable outputs: all lie within the dynometer's resolution limits of one another. Or, put another way, you'd get the same variance running a stock car 3 consecutive times.

However, both the w/m "on" runs had more power than the w/m "off" run below 85mph, and that difference is larger than system resolution: in other words, it's real and it's repeatable.

I think your conclusion is prematurely wrong. I'll print out the graphs and integrate areas under each curve next week.

 

[tothemax]

Tnx Nick... That's why I put out there .... I knew there was some real brain power and science on this Club

Above 85mph, the runs 2, 3, 4 have indistinguishable outputs: all lie within the dynometer's resolution limits of one another. Or, put another way, you'd get the same variance running a stock car 3 consecutive times.

However, both the w/m "on" runs had more power than the w/m "off" run below 85mph, and that difference is larger than system resolution: in other words, it's real and it's repeatable.

I think your conclusion is prematurely wrong. I'll print out the graphs and integrate areas under each curve next week.

 

[Farfromovin]

Above 85mph, the runs 2, 3, 4 have indistinguishable outputs: all lie within the dynometer's resolution limits of one another. Or, put another way, you'd get the same variance running a stock car 3 consecutive times.

However, both the w/m "on" runs had more power than the w/m "off" run below 85mph, and that difference is larger than system resolution: in other words, it's real and it's repeatable.

I think your conclusion is prematurely wrong. I'll print out the graphs and integrate areas under each curve next week.

Naw, I'm gonna wave the bravo sierra (bs in military speak) flag on that one Nick. The distinct differences in the lower regions all come into play because the operator did not start the dyno at the same RPM. Quite obvious really... Any differences in power after they have reached boost levels is simply differences in how the tune responds to "stomping" on the accelerator at different RPM's.

 

[nicklockard]

Naw, I'm gonna wave the bravo sierra (bs in military speak) flag on that one Nick. The distinct differences in the lower regions all come into play because the operator did not start the dyno at the same RPM. Quite obvious really... Any differences in power after they have reached boost levels is simply differences in how the tune responds to "stomping" on the accelerator at different RPM's.

duhhh, negative, Comanche. That's ex-military science dweeb speak for: "of course I looked at that, I'm not a farcing idiot".

Look from 66mph to 86mph for comparison between run3 and run4. He's on the juice (go pedal), the ECU has caught up and w/m has more power.

Look from 67-86mph for the comparison between run 2 and run3. Less clear though because it appeared to bog down with water/meth?

If you have that raw data tothemax, I can numerically analyze it and determine system resolution (aka: detection limits).

At any rate, Phillip, I think that you can reasonably argue about the ECU's response behaviors at early rpm's; it's valid to bring it up, but do you really think from 73 mph to 86 mph is due to ECU phantoms? In each case, it's had plenty of time to spool the turbo, respond, get on the juice, and figure things out. Yet the w/m runs produced more power. Hard to argue that ECU ghosts are responsible there, I think.

 

[Farfromovin]

duhhh, negative, Comanche. That's ex-military science dweeb speak for: "of course I looked at that, I'm not a farcing idiot".

Look from 66mph to 86mph. In every case, he's on the juice (go pedal), the ECU has caught up and w/m has more powa.

And it's greater than system resolution.

If you have that raw data tothemax, I can numerically analyze it and determine system resolution (aka: detection limits) and tell you statistically to what confidence level percent the differences are good for.

They're real. I know data.

You know data and I know tuning and dynos ;-) That is boost response from varying rpms.

 

[nicklockard]

sorry P, edited post above while you were replying.

 

[Farfromovin]

I see the edit. I'm gonna say w/m has NOTHING to do with it and stand firm. Agree to disagree then. So many little things could cause that minor percentage there. Stuff as minor as getting on it roughly 14mph earlier generates more heat quicker. More heat quicker will lead to more power from the turbine earlier. And then just the general boost response characteristics of everything under his hood. W/M had NOTHING to do with the increases/decreases in power. No measurable amount outside of the dynomometer resolution limits

 

[JasonCzerak]

What Is your water/meth ratio?

Remember, meth is a fuel. If your over fueled the meth does nothing. If anything premature combustion and higher cylinder pressures. Run straight distilled water to keep piston temps Down


The obvious proff of a lack of air is the gain on nitrous.

 

[tothemax]

Was using 25% meth solution...

.... Hurry up TDIinTexas.... daddy needs more air

What Is your water/meth ratio?

Remember, meth is a fuel. If your over fueled the meth does nothing. If anything premature combustion and higher cylinder pressures. Run straight distilled water to keep piston temps Down


The obvious proof of a lack of air is the gain on nitrous.

 

[Farfromovin]

It's quite obvious how a little "haze" at WOT can turn into 50whp with NOS on these diesels. I wouldn't have thought it was worth that much power. So, I suppose if you had a huge turbo or two, you could get 278whp on your current injection system right?

 

[tothemax]

This is what these numbers are telling me too...

According Adam from LCD... (he's the king of NOS).. said that he could easily have gotten over 300 if I let him spray a little more NOS in the air box.

This makes me think I need a bigger turbo more than I need a 12 mm pump!

Hey ... BTW are you gonna let me round that 216.89 HP off to 217HP?

It's quite obvious how a little "haze" at WOT can turn into 50whp with NOS on these diesels. I wouldn't have thought it was worth that much power. So, I suppose if you had a huge turbo or two, you could get 278whp on your current injection system right?

 

[thekidfan]

This is what these numbers are telling me too...

According Adam from LCD... (he's the king of NOS).. said that he could easily have gotten over 300 if I let him spray a little more NOS in the air box.

This makes me think I need a bigger turbo more than I need a 12 mm pump!

I was wondering which one of those guys it was Stay away from Adam that guy is dangerous with the giggle gas
Good points on the gains to be had with more air meaning you already have plenty of fuel. Have a buddy with a VE pump that gets an easy 100 rwhp off W/M and I could barely get better then 30 rwhp on my P-pumped truck.
Either way nice numbers, Congrats

 

[tothemax]

Here we go with video http://snaptastic.phanfare.com/tdi/4831669

Special thanks to OnePutt for filming and sharing it

 

[nicklockard]

I see the edit. I'm gonna say w/m has NOTHING to do with it and stand firm. Agree to disagree then. So many little things could cause that minor percentage there. Stuff as minor as getting on it roughly 14mph earlier generates more heat quicker. More heat quicker will lead to more power from the turbine earlier. And then just the general boost response characteristics of everything under his hood. W/M had NOTHING to do with the increases/decreases in power. No measurable amount outside of the dynomometer resolution limits

Finding this very hard to believe. A 3-5 hp difference sustained over TWO runs with w/m versus 1 without, and also sustained over several hundred rpm's range, AND one of the runs started earlier and one LATER. No way, your argument just doesn't wash. The difference in power is consistent, even when the starting conditions are not. You can't hand wave this away as "magik ECU foofoo juice".

Look closely: in run2 with DO3, the operator got on the fuel later than all the other runs, yet the power is higher from 73mph on, and it's sustained. In order for your logic to hold true, it should have the lowest power of them all because of "boost differences", but it doesn't.

You're wrong. The data don't lie. Within-run precision/variation is small--it's approximately the peak-to-peak ripple magnitude. Typically calibrated instrumentation very rarely will have same-day, same-time between-run intermediate precision/repeatability more than twice as large. I do this stuff for a living, and I'm right. In order for the difference to be due to magic ECU bunnies, it would not be a)consistent across test conditions (early throttle versus late throttle starts), NOR would it be over 4X system resolution, AND consistent for a large rpm range.

 

[Farfromovin]

Fine Nick, I concede to you're 3hp gain, mainly because it is VERY difficult for me to even measure it on my tiny 15" laptop monitor Jeez, it's like trying to argue with a scientist or something

 

[nicklockard]

No doubt, the difference is small, but real.

When are you adding nitrous?

 

[tothemax]

Nick, Not sure if your questions is directed at me or Phillip but .... my plans are to first add the 2260vk turbo (TDIinTexas Kit), then maybe a 12 mm pump. With those, I think I should be able to keep up with the Joneses for a while, do better at the road course and at the drag races at next year's TDI Fest.... (Not trying to come in first... but just respectable)

So I am not thinking I want to invest $800 for a NOS Boost progressive kit... just so I can beat Justin, Rich or O.C.TDI at the TDI Fest next year..

What I am really striving for is the NASA HPDE for now, maybe time trials & enduro races later. I am really having a ball at the road course track smoking rice burners, BMW's, mustangs and even naturally aspirated Porches and ....loving it. More air will make me even faster there. I just love it when; in between sessions , a performance gassers driver come up to me and ask "What the F_ck kindda engine you got in that car?"

I think NOS is for fun, great on the dyno and at drag races but I really do not think it's in the cards for me ..... but who knows... there is a saying in french with translated goes like this "Never says Fountain, I will never drink your water"

No doubt, the difference is small, but real.

When are you adding nitrous?

 

[dieselpower04]

Great numbers!! All that on a 17/22?

A real NOS kit would spray into the intake manfold right? Its kinda cool it circulated all the way around the intercooler system before hitting the engine!

Bravo!

 

[loudspl]

Great numbers!! All that on a 17/22?

A real NOS kit would spray into the intake manfold right? Its kinda cool it circulated all the way around the intercooler system before hitting the engine!

Bravo!

Either way works. I have mine going in before the manifold after the intercooler but some kits have it going in right at the airbox such as this..

 

[tothemax]

Great numbers!! All that on a 17/22?

A real NOS kit would spray into the intake manfold right? Its kinda cool it circulated all the way around the intercooler system before hitting the engine!

Bravo!

Tnx! I am super happy w/ the results

They just removed the top of the airbox (where the accordion is hooked up) , one guy was holding the top of the airbox up and the other guy was spraying the NOS into it

I was told the best place to spray it is as close as possible to the intake manifold or on the intake itself if possible for maximum cooling benefits.

 

[Diesel_Benz]

Unfortunately, the Left Coast Diesel dyno could not get the torque numbers so this result is based strictly on HP output.

Um, you can't calculate HP without knowing RPM and torque...
Horsepower isn't a unit, its math.

You know the horsepower. You know the speed. You can figure out RPM/MPH in normal driving. That means you can know torque.

 

[JasonCzerak]

Um, you can't calculate HP without knowing RPM and torque...
Horsepower isn't a unit, its math.

You know the horsepower. You know the speed. You can figure out RPM/MPH in normal driving. That means you can know torque.

Not the case on an inertia dyno, like a dynojet 240h. It calculates HP from the rate of accelerating a known mass. It will give you WHP and wheel speed (rpm kinda)

To get torque it needs a tach hook up to relate the drum speed to your motor rpm to graph useable data on you motors output

 

[MAXRPM]

I think you are not going to see any benefit from a 25% meth on the dyno, I am sure that the only 2 benefit are cooling and keeping everything clean inside the engine,,maybe if you go up on the meth % you may see a diffference, but risks are involved as you go up in concentration, just like NOS.

 

[shizzler]

... but all you need to know is wheel diameter and gearing to easily calculate rpm from mph. Then you have torque. I am always surprised when the dyno operators don't just plug in the numbers; or is it not possible? That would be pretty lame if not.

If you just pick out a few points from the HP curve you can (roughly) calculate torque yourself anyway.

With stock tire size, 3.16 R & P and 1.029 4th gear:
60mph = 2625rpm 150 HP = 300 lbf-ft
65mph = 2844rpm 172 HP = 318 lbf-ft
70mph = 3063rpm 180 HP = 309 lbf-ft

And probably decreasing thereafter. Earlier romp on the pedal (starting from lower rpm) might have given more, but maybe not.

Oh and these were from the darker green No-NOS HP line.

 

[Farfromovin]

I think you are not going to see any benefit from a 25% meth on the dyno, I am sure that the only 2 benefit are cooling and keeping everything clean inside the engine,,maybe if you go up on the meth % you may see a diffference, but risks are involved as you go up in concentration, just like NOS.

There have been calculations done by highly respected members that show water should decrease peak cylinder pressures significantly. Robert, I'd continue to spray if I were you, even just a single nozzle...

 

[dieselpower04]

There have been calculations done by highly respected members that show water should decrease peak cylinder pressures significantly. Robert, I'd continue to spray if I were you, even just a single nozzle...

I like that idea. Along with EGT help. Those two things make it worth it in my opinion. Adding it to the mod-to-do list...

 

[ndamico]

Adam cracks me up with that bottle in the third video..nice going buddy