AS A FORMER DEMOLITION EXPERT, A CHEMICAL ENGINEER AND ENERGY RESEARCHER, I UTTERLY SALUTE YOU THAT YOU HAVE AUTHORITATIVELY SEPARATED DETONATION, DEFLAGRATION AND COMBUTSION!!! [aka air and fuel should NEVER EVER EVER DETONATE in an engine!!! (aka an actual "explosion")] I may, some day, should I advance my trucks to the point of high performance I JUST MIGHT use water injection. Right now, however, I am working on 'external' combustion cycles. BUT!!! NONETHELESS!!! I 100% SUPPORT... This IMMENSE WISDOM you give people!!!
NACA - National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. One of the few government programs actually providing a public benefit at no additional charge. I read Riccardo's work a long time ago. It is amazing how much water can be injected, and how much impact it has on cylinder temperatures because it has such a high heat of vaporization.
Back in the late seventies when the octane level was dropping in the California fuel, I had an engine that ran a 10.3:1 compression ratio in 180 psi cylinder pressure..... And 91 octane was not it's friend. It was a company called spearco that was based down in Santa Monica if I recall correctly that built a water vapor injector that I purchased and hooked up...... My dad was an aerospace engineer who turned me on to the idea..... It was very simple simply using the vacuum of the engine to create water vapor and suck it in through the base of the carburetor...... It worked excellent and I still have that device they sitting in my attic
@@samuelmartin2817 it's actually very simple..... Basically they took a glass mayonnaise jar, took a piece of copper line and ran it from the lid to about an inch from the bottom and then a second line attached to the lid barely protruding through that was quite a bit larger.... About a quarter of an inch..... This hooked up to your vacuum line and as the engine would run and pull vacuum it created a bubbling effect inside the jar with the water and the condensation would get sucked in by The collector at the top and get sucked into the engine. About the same moisture content as if it was raining. I can tell you this. But it definitely worked because I was able to kick the time and almost back up to where I had it when I could get 98 octane
Dave, I'm running a 2.5L Dodge 4 cyl. with factory Mitso. turbo at 17 PSI. ( WOT ) with an intercooler. I added a Volvo cold start gasoline injector about 6 inches from the throttle plate, but it runs too rich now. Your explanation about water injection has just opened up a whole new arena of possibilities for me. I truly appreciate the effort you made to explain all this to us DIY people. Thanks so much.
Were you lean before adding the injector? On crude efi systems that are hard to tune, adding an injector can sometimes work, but you’d usually use the same type as the other 4 and wire it to one of the existing ones to get a 25% bump. Otherwise tuning should be the first solution and/or going larger on the injectors.
@@_..-.._..-.._ I first added +20% injectors, which allowed boost increase from stock 11 psi to 15 psi. That is the tripping point of starting to go too lean. To go higher, the 5th injector was added. A pressure switch brings on the 5th injector above 15 psi. I tried adding restrictor orifice to the 5th injector, but it is still too rich. Now I think I will have to reduce fuel pressure to the extra injector. It will be trial and error.
And my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection... ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
You will need to remove some fuel, with water or water methanol injection. rule of thumb to start, If you need 10 pounds of fuel per unit of time, use 9 pounds of fuel and 1 pound of water.
Very nice! Are you running the slushbox 3 speed auto, or did it come with a manual transmission? My 89 LeBaron 2.5 w/ mitsu turbo pushes through the converter beyond 13 psi. It's so ass. On partial throttle, it howls like an injured wolf. I'll be using Vizard's theory behind my tuning, after I swap the Getrag A555 and install water/meth. 20 psi, here I come! Good luck on your build 👍
Years ago i had a 80 Camaro z28 and it was a dog lol . So i raised the compression ratio to 10.9 , cast iron heads . Black jack headers . Com cam 292 solid lift . Elbrock water injection. When i used the water injection that engine ran pretty decent .. with out the water it would ping its self to bits . I knew that water injection was used in WW2 . I remember how clean the cylinder was when i pulled the heads to have them angle milled after running water injection ..Never thought about using soluble oil , good idea . Really appreciate your videos sir
I've always been curious about avoiding carbon deposits in the compression chamber using petrol , would you say it's equivalent to engines that run on methanol?
Years ago I picked up a copy of your "How to Build a Max Horsepower Chevy Small Block on a Budget" book and read it cover to cover. As soon as your video popped up, I knew who were and subscribed. I want to say THANK YOU for sharing all of your knowledge and experience!
This gentleman has probably forgotten more about engines than most of us will ever learn. I love how he puts the cookies on the bottom shelf, so everyone can understand his lectures. Keep up the great work! I do wonder if water injection could also reduce the need for intercoolers on turbocharged/supercharged applications.
National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics. You give me joy. That sounded like a wild idea, but you have convinced me it could work. I love your enthusiasm, and your extensive development and research background shows at every moment.
Holy crap. I was scratching my head about water injection when I was 10 or 11 years old. Currently 52. I need to step back and come back to this one. Much appreciated and bringing back memories
My father was an industrial engineer at G.E. in Ft. Wayne's bomber engine plant, turbo/supercharger divisions and was one of a handful of engineers responsible for quality production. I agree with you whole heartidly about the P47 Thunderbolt. Republic Aircraft built some of our most durable aircraft. The Pratt and Whitney R2800 radial was a great engine. Turbo/superchargers were needed to gain altitude/speed to get higher than the Germain fighters.
@@LeachimSagrav333 Yes, Water/Methanol was used on the P-47 for "Wartime Emergency Power" it had a toggle-switch labeled "WEP". Early on it was enough for five minutes, later for over ten minutes. The first fighter with a war emergency setting was the Spitfire. It had a wire that stopped the throttle from going above 6psi of boost. If you pushed thru the wire, you got 12psi of boost. This was after the US supplied the Brits with 100 octane fuel, and they could run higher boost. But the engine had to be serviced after the wire was broken until they beefed up the Merlin later on.
I really like water injection. I ran a 6 cylinder Holden in the 90’s with an old Edelbrock water injection system (the old red ecu system with 3 trim pots and a crude map sensor built in). It was terrible to tune and the water nozzle was just a brass tube blanked at one end with 2x60 thou holes towards the end. I nearly gave up on it but one night, I went on a late night drive, the planet’s and stars must have aligned or something because this thing just came alive like it never had before and after having a load of fun for around half an hour, the power dropped off again. It dropped off because water injection ran out of water. I just left settings as they were but adjusted it to come on later in the rev range but it never worked as well. It was a tad frustrating because the water ran out so quickly. I still have it now somewhere in the garage.
Well done for highlighting why WI is shit. It's unreliable, you have to fill the tank up every five minutes, it's heavy and people become rapidly bored of it.
Possibly be from the engine not coming up to temperature before the injection, or air fuel mixture being off. Should put an O2 sensor on and figure it out that way
@@michaelatkin9649 yes, I agree the temperature not up to running temp. The scale readings on the adjustable trimpots weren’t accurate as far as I can remember and they were very sensitive to any adjustment. It was a constant trial and error thing. On the trimpots, 3 of them, There was an rpm range, a 4,6 or 8cyl setting and a water volume setting. It was like trying to tune an old, worn carb with air leaks everywhere, you could have it right, with the engine at operating temp one day and next day, it wasn’t right under the same conditions next. When it was right though, it was awesome.
My daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection... ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
wOw the 90's. Tech was still being born and reborn relearned. 2023 = still is hahahah. i am looking forward to doing this to a big Alfa dan mahle engine when it comes out in 2024! or after that sometime.
This finally explains to me why the Pratt and Whitney R-2800C in the P47M and later thunderbolts burn less fuel at War Emergency Power with water injection vs Full continuous power with out. The water injection allows for a much leaner fuel mixture especially with an air cooled engine and that with the expansion ratio added from the water increases cylinder pressure with less fuel. Excellent Video! 👍
Awesome lesson. Thank you for your openness with your incredible knowledge and experience. I've run 20+ psi on 9.5:1 compression 6 and 8 cyl engines with water only injection, no intercooling and pump gas. Economy was never the goal. It's amazing how little performance guys use such a time proven thing.
@@jamesmedina2062 Snow Performance makes systems for carbs. Had mine set for 3/4 throttle and above it truly does work. Use water and windshield washer fluid, 50/50. Simple and cheap will also keep the carbon off the back of your valves and really resists pinging
@@gordocarbosir i have high compression, turbocharged motor in arizona and I’m thinking of running the carb plate. Do you have the shear one or the regular and how do you make sure the carb comes on at 3/4 throttle?
Thanks for posting. Im a disabled gearhead, so bench racing these theories is most enjoyable. My next build god willing will employ much of what I have learned. The tow car was faster. Lol God bless you!
Hi David. I use methanol water injection in my bmw, it is the best I have known for the supercharged engine, I use a compression ratio of 9.75 to 1 with 2 maps of 2 and 2.5 bar. I use 50% water and methanol. I have the injector placed about 25cm before the throttle, the injector and the module are all homemade. Best regards
It really works, almost lost my engine when I had a wiring problem and it didnt inject, thank you Jesus for knock retard. That is the downside of relying on a minimally engineered product like cheap Snow and AEM systems.
I have been using water/methanol injection for well over 40 years, in both NA and turbocharged engines. I started using it after reading about it in Hugh MacInnes' book on turbocharging. The results have been excellent without exception, from the simplest home made system to more sophisticated variable flow systems. Glad to see someone with Mr. Vizard's experience and wisdom addressing the subject. Some say that it is a bad idea because if you run out of fluid you'll grenade your engine. The remedy for that is to pay attention and make sure you have enough fluid available for the requirement at hand. I currently use it on a turbocharged engine running boost levels way too high for this era's crappy gasoline, and with absolutely no detonation problems. Thumbs up for water injection.
So are you saying I could put that great big Detroit 92 series turbocharger on my 8.1 l Silverado push the compression way high with water injection and greatly improve thermal efficiency??
@@flappingflight8537 Did not know that but seems probable as they used water methanol injection on aircraft engines during WWII so they have 'some experience' (FW190, et.al.)
@@tomstulc9143Thats what i was thinking too. Did you tune your 8.1 i looked at the 5.3 and 6.0 stock tune and there almost the same gm left lots of room at upper rmp range got my 5.3 to 6,500 and trans to downshift sooner still going strong at 270,000 miles.
I saw the title and immediately said water. I then flashed back to reading Performance with Economy, I wasn't even in high school yet. I really do appreciate you and Andy doing this project, the knowledge still applies today. You all have a fantastic weekend!
This is actually WWII tech and my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection... ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
Water injection is very common in the diesel tractor pulling world,its been used successfully for about 50 years now.with a 3 stage compound turbo system using 4 chargers 300 lbs of boost was quite common at one time.water is injected in the atmosphere side of the compressors then between each stage and in port finally.find a super stock diesel puller and itll amaze you at the volume of h2o thats used in a 330 foot distance.
That was Smokey Unick. I think he did a Vega first then maybe a Dodge Omni. He was getting a claimed 100mp with only a 20% drop in power. Then I never heard about it again. Did his experiments fail? If so, why wasn't a reason given for the failure so that other engineers could try to solve any problems that were discovered? Or did Smokey sell the concept with a "Non-Disclosure Agreement" NDA clause? $$$???
Brian Crower made a modified Briggs and Stratton engine which ran with a 6 stroke cycle with a "steam stroke" as you described. It worked quite well from what I remember reading about it.
I knew this would be about water injection. So glad David is on board. Yes, you dilute the air charge a little bit resulting in less HP/psi of air, but you can significantly open the tuning window for a given fuel. Im doing a dual fuel setup for my drag and drive build. 80/20 meth/water in the secondary fuel system. Blending it in where needed.
My dad was doing water injection on a 235 straight 6 Chevy engine at least in the early 70s if not before. Not making a comparison just saying that some of these ideas have been around and maybe a lot of us had forgotten them. Of course this fella here has improved upon them
@@CAROLDDISCOVER-1983 I know more old timers that will run avgas or c16 on the street than I do ones that support or care about the science of water injection. Most don't even believe it works. Same for my generation but now it's all about e85, even if it means driving 2 hrs one way to fill a 55 gal drum and drive it back. I have had great success with water injection myself. Just glad to see someone like David Vizard showing some appreciation that's all.
@scrapmetal_sleepers420 I'm glad your trying to clean up your statements cuz David Vizards knowledge of the industry is so vast that he has forgotten more than most will ever know
Back in the mid 70s had a buddy that was an aerospace engineer, he had a Ford F-150 pickup truck 390 Fe turboed with water injection system he made. Garrett turbo came from a work project. When you get on the throttle the engine would PING. The more water that was injected the ping ping would go away and you could keep your foot planted into the throttle. Truck was a screamer on the Los Angeles freeways
Dad bought a 67 Mercury Montcalm in 69. Three kids coming into their teens and a new baby did not fit the Valiant too good. The Merc had a 2V 390. Coming off a light the marbles would rattle 2 or 3 times and then it was good. I believe spark plug location was not the best.
I used to run an Edelbrock Vara-jection water injection system on a Ford 390 with 12:1 compression at 4500 feet altitude back in the early 80's, when properly tuned it made good power and the water would absolutely stop any detonation running 87 octane fuel, fuel economy with that engine was amazing, I think I have the Vara-jection still, I hope so because this makes me want to play with it again.
@@kengilliskg That was on a daily driver, a 3/4 ton 4x4 truck, it was the only way it could be timed correctly without running avgas, the compression ended up that high somewhat by accident using 2bbl heads with 4 bbl flattop pistons.
Did you run a radical cam profile or stock cam profile? I want to try building a 14-16:1 big block and use water injection like he mentioned at the 17:03 mark. I wonder at what rpm I could drive on 87 before having to use the water injection.
First of all, thank you David for covering this for the rest of us. I bought and read a few of your books way back in the early 80s, when I decided to build my first turbocharged car, a 2.3 pinto powered Capri, which I cobbled together a water for. My water injection system was crude, but effective. After watching this video I've decided to try water injection again on my turbo Mustang. Thanks for the insight.
My father tried water injection on the 1967 440 GTX. He use the windshield washer with a spider made from AC capillary tubing and mounted over the carburetor. It did reduce detonation but was hard to regulate and only lasted a short while.
I've been interested in water injection for a long time myself. I have a 2011 Ford Flex with the Ecoboost 3.5 V6 in it. I got the engine tuned a while back (since removed so I can go back to running 87), and before I installed the tune, I used FORScan to look at a bunch of different stuff like boost and fuel enrichment and the like. Something that surprised me is that I regularly saw fuel enrichment as low as 10.25:1 and on a couple rare occasions it dipped below 10 on the factory tune! I was blown away. No wonder this thing is such a pig on fuel for any kind of driving except highway. They're doing crazy amounts of fuel enrichment under boost, and I'm assuming it's because it's a non-EGR engine, and so they have to rely entirely on fuel enrichment to cool the combustion to deal with NOx. What's funny is that the performance tune never got below 11:1 even though it was running significantly higher boost numbers. Once I learned all of this and read up on the forums about water/meth injection, I had the idea to have my tuner make me up an 87 octane fuel economy tune and just run water injection without the methanol. If we're going for MPG's, there's no sense in pouring more fuel down the hatch, so I figured just water to cool the charge would be enough. Not to mention the cleaning ability for the intake valves which is such a huge problem on these DI engines. Now that I've listened to your presentation here I'm even more convinced that this is a good idea.
Ya i notice on 5.3 silverados form 99 to 03 13:1 at idle to 2000 RPM. I heard its so the catalytic converter heats up and burns everything for proper emissions. So my tune i got it 16:1 at idle 14:7 at 2000 RPMs and 12:1 at 6000 RPMS.
I experimented with water injection in the '80's with a mopar 383, I kept adding water (more is better theory) until I bent a rod, the one thing I do remember is how clean the spark plugs were, they looked brand new everytime I checked them, thank you David for posting this, it answered a lot of questions I had back then.
WWII tech and my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection... ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
I agree completely I have read many of your books and bought many of them I tried many experiments even when gasoline was less than $0.80 a gallon for 87 octane I did follow a lot of your recommendations your recommendations were always spot-on
My most favorite video from you guys yet. Such great info. Also really loved your mentioning of the WWII P47 Thundetbolt and your correct assessment regarding how good it really was!
you just have to love this guy, his knowledge of things is unbelievable, just as someone else said, he probably has forgotten more than we will ever know! he just fascinates me, i love how he takes everything to the limit, thats awesome, right on keep it up we all love ya!
I’m late to the ballgame, but as a student of military aviation history of WWII, the comments regarding the P-47 have merit. The -51 was certainly a good airplane, but its arrival in the 8th Air Force didn’t occur in force until early 1944. The P-38 did all the heavy lifting with long range bomber escort up until that time salvaging day light bombing. The P-47 was range limited but had several advantages in air-to-air (highest roll rate and good in a dive) and tac-air (excellent dive bomber, rugged, excellent firepower). By the time Big Week came along, 38s and 47s bled the Luftwaffe, and pilots in those groups went from green to veteran pilots and the Luftwaffe suffered attrition amongst their veterans as a consequence. Arnold took over from Eaker and replaced the -38 (which along with a photo recce Spit were the FIRST fighters over Berlin, not the -51) with the 51 for long range escort. PLUS, he released these now veteran pilots from close cover escort so they could hunt the Luftwaffe. Therefore, the 51 never had to play defense against the Luftwaffe’s best. Whereas 38 and 47 drivers (short range escort for the 47) did whilst Eaker ran the 8th. The P-47, subsequently, did much of the heavy lifting in the ETO, and the type scored heavily during Big Week which broke the Luftwaffe’s back. That was in March of 1944. The P-51 pilots scored heavily during a time in which the Luftwaffe was broken and Air Superiority already established. Not to gainsay the 51 at all, but the P-47 should not be overshadowed. It was a far superior weapon for tactical aerial operations (as was the P-38 for that matter) and once it got it’s four blade prop and could actually climb, it was every bit the dog fighter as the P-51 when it’s pilot stuck to energy tactics. Anecdotally, I’ve spoken with a good number of pilots who transitioned from the P-38 into the P-51 and a couple who flew the -51 after flying the -47. ALL of them preferred their original mounts, surprisingly - even the P-38 drivers in spite of the problems with that aircraft in the ETO.
This, is the conversation I've always been interested in. Every time I try to bring up the efficiency, all anyone wants to do is turn the conversation to there's no substitute for cubic inches.
i remember always going to your articles in MM&FF way before i looked at the centerfold cars so i could learn more, same with Richard Holdener's articles. so nice that you guys have a platform you can go more in depth with on here. i need this man to build me a high compression LS1 that gets like 70mpg and makes 500hp. lol
When fuel was horrible my dad installed water injection on his 1974 F250 with a 390. Detonation was so bad at the time and the water injection that was just a squirter that ran off a window washer pump and tank. It was above the carburetor and worked at at least half throttle to wide open. It killed detonation immediately and you could feel the power.
Thank you Mr. Vizard, you are helping me build a draw through turbo SBC in my garage! Your videos have been incredibly helpful and prevented this guy from making mistakes.
@@gedas3419 Throttle body doesn't really need to be in front of a turbo in a carb, it can be behind it. Then there would be no vacuum in the compressor.
@@gedas3419 The turbo might need an extra seal if the carb is in front of it, as the turbo would be subjected to the fuel spray from the carb, and full manifold vacuum. The Corvair turbo (non ball bearing) had that extra seal. I ran one back in the 70s... Adding an intercooler to the system would get kinda spooky as well.
I’m going to test out water injection on my mostly stock, low compression, LS motor. I will make my own nozzles and see how big a droplet size is best for my application. I can make the water injection turn on easily with a WOT switch and I will modify my timing table to increase the timing under WOT conditions only. We will see how much power I can gain. Thanks for the video, you are always inspiring me to do things that I might not otherwise!
I remember in my early days of mechanical school, that water injection was used in some WW2 bombers at take off to remove reduce detonation and to keep the combustion chamber clean as well, if I'm not mistaken it is used on the B-52 at take off as well either to clean the chamber or keep the temperature in check.
If in a B52, which is a jet and not piston engine, it would be for cooling but also to increase the mass of the jet exhaust, creating more thrust. Not sure if it does use water injection though, I’ll take your word for it.
go buy a tesla and consign this old fossil to design titanium zimmers and carbon fibre commode pans and give him a part in the simpsons just kidding i hve a carbureted volvo t5 turbo blow thru 2 inch su but left in the injector rail for future messing it runs like a peach and scotty kilmer says carbs dont work on 5 pot motors
David, I thought I knew a lot about water injection, a lot of which came from your Performance with Economy book. How wrong was I. I will have to watch this again, many times, to even partially absorb some of the information. Thank you for a totally enlightening and entertaining video. Terry from Australia.
in the late 70s driving a 66 283 automatic Bellaire we were getting better than 25 miles per gallon average driving from Illinois to Maryland and back. All because of water-methanol injection we were playing with. The problem was finding water when we filled up the gas tank😂 on the trips. As a machinist water soluble cutting oils worked perfect keeping things from rusting. Amazing what college kids will do to save gas money.
71 302 Torino, C4 , 24 mpg daily drive to and from Seminole co, to SeaWorld and to my job . Wore out two transmissions first was factory and 145, they rebuilt it before they knew me ( was the mom in laws) and it lasted 35k and I had a friend who built it. Never burned oil .
Thank you Mr Vizard! We appreciate you sharing your knowledge and insights. Really amazing stuff, makes me wonder how much good information has and will be lost due to not getting shared. Super exciting to think MPG is possible as you describe. I am inspired to start planning a maximum MPG build. Thanks again and keep sharing what you can for us who need to think outside the box. Bravo!
Mr Vizard Thank you for this video. I built a 496 8-71 blown engine for my boat. The engine has a blower shop 4 plate billet intercooler and I incorporated a direct port water meth injection system below the intercooler. My goal is to have it run 15 lbs of boost on 91 octane. The water meth system has a progressive controller and can be tuned with a boost curve. After watching your video I have to ask if taking out the methanol in my system would be a benefit. It sure would cut down in costs as well as not having to change the tune on the engine. I will be taking it to dyno when I get past all of my customer obligations. I built a NA 572 for customer and we had it Dynoed at Westech. The engine did not have a detonation problem when running normally. So one would argue why use the water methanol. I installed a direct port system as well on this engine. With no other changes it picked up an additional 15 hp. The intended purpose of the water meth was to use it for the nitrous enrichment. Steve Brule commented that I was trying to band aid a problem. The engine has a Hogan sheet metal EFI intake and is run off a Holley dominator ecu. I plumbed a Nitrous express direct port unit and jetted it for 300 hp. It is a dry system with the enrichment coming form the engines fuel injectors. Steve talked me out of this and wanted to run race gas. The customer was there with me and since I don't own the engine I went along with Steve's decision. Now that I have watched your video I'm curious if I could have pulled it off with the water injection. Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks BK
What a great video! As both a aviation maintenance student and a performance engine builder and enthusiast it benefited me greatly! You’re one awesome dude, DV! You really know your stuff
David Vizard is misleading you. the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel. We know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel.. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster . By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance. By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster. And by retarding the timing because the fuel igniting faster, more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke. Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal effici @mrdg the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel..we know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel.. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster . By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance. By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster. And by retarding the timing more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke. Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal efficiency / combustion efficiency of fuel.. Green vapour draw enhances combustion efficiency prove me wrong Mr. Vizard. .
@@brettjasonheadinventor I don't believe he has to. I'm no expert and though water does in fact not improve combustion of fuel, as you've pointed out, the way we are using it in ICE's, we don't need it to, so I don't get your point. Also, speeding up the burn significantly would make it an explosion, a.k.a. detonation, a.k.a. ping, and it's horrible for the engine. The reason we have advance in the ignition timing, other than in normal, proper tuning, is due to increased RPM providing decreased time for a complete burn, so we advance it to get back that time. If we do not advance, way less efficiency and power. In short, too much advance = damaged engine, not enough advance = horrible efficiency, power, economy and emissions. To increase efficiency we need to burn the air/fuel mixture more completely, more efficiently, which is not the same as burning it faster, though as long as it doesn't detonate, faster could be better. That's where the water comes is as though it certainly doesn't improve the burn of the air/fuel mixture, it also does not harm it, slow it down, etc. It helps to control it, to stabilize it, by keeping it from detonating. It does this in a number of ways, from cooling the intake charge (which also improves the density) to helping to cool the exhaust valves, another common source of detonation. I'm not certain if I'm simply misunderstanding what you wrote, or if some of it is just wrong. Hoping you can explain things more clearly as I do not want to misunderstand you.
@@nYdGeo what you said is what been taught and practiced. Its all rubbish. It's what they want you to believe. Vizard won't reply as it will destroy his understanding of chemical combustion and his knowledge of internal combustion engine tuning. .To simply explain ... When combustion is complete only CO2 and water is produced. To achieve complete combustion, the fuel/ air mixture must be thoroughly mixed and completely burnt when ignited. Therefore the fuel/air mixture must burn at such a fast rate, that no advancing of ignition timing is required at any rpm. Achieving this would mean the thermal efficiency increases, leaving no unburnt or partially combusted fuel. Nothing except for producing CO2 and water. Complete combustion equals more power and less fuel waste and less emissions. Less black soot, which is partially burnt fuel. We know complete combustion doesn't occur as modern engines require emissions control systems to reburn the waste fuel and old engines and Vizard engine tuning knowledge produces soot all because of incomplete combustion. Green vapour draw systems enhances combustion efficiency. Reduces fuel waste and emissions..we know it works as there is less soot in the exhaust tail pipe.( Plus from emission testing). I have offered millions of dollars to anyone who can debunk the system. It's seem David Vizard or any other so called expert, won't accept the challenge. We have the proof it works.
@@nYdGeo I repied to your comment thrugh my Green Vapour Draw Systems account. we would be happy to send you a vapor draw kit to prove David Vizard is wrong..
@@brettjasonheadinventor I might be interested in exploring this with you if I could find anything whatsoever on your green vapor draw system besides some RUclips videos. Once again, I believe you misunderstand me. I cannot believe in nor deny the effectiveness of the green vapor draw system because I can find zero information on it. What I can tell you, and I'm pretty damn confident about this, is that what you posted about water injection is incorrect. It has been used for like a century in numerous applications, with spectacular results. That said, it does not mean that your system is not better, more effective, etc. Again, I would be very interested in learning about the system you're promoting, but I cannot find any information about it at all. That presents a bit of a problem, yes? I suspect that maybe you're generating green hydrogen and using that to enhance the efficiency of conventional, petroleum fueled ICE's, but that's totally a guess.
I was fitting turbos from the early 70,s mainly Holden red 6,s and running 20lbs and up on stock component motors, with water injection using Weber idle jets to regulate the amount and modded dizzy to suit with almost unbelievable results.. I also use drip method water injection on many motors for the cleaning value.. NOW as to your video I thank you so much,,, but i feel to get the best from it i will need to watch it AGAIN...and AGAIN Eddie Australia
I am amazed at what I just learned. My understanding of water injection is not complete & I think I will have to watch this a few times. Thank you for being you.
DV, Great information!! Back in the late 80's to early 90's my grandfather who was a physicist & engineer for GM long ago, had a daily driven 1981 chevy k20 that had a 400sbc w/ aluminum heads that was running water injection, it had a 6-71blower on top of it and it was on the side of having fairly high compression, even though i was a well educated child at the time i dont recall the psi of boost that was made or what the compression ratio was but if i recall im pretty sure it had to be somewhere around 12.0:1-13.5:1 and ran on 87 octane, making around 700hp without breaking a sweat... there were alot of people in complete awe of how that truck worked... Thats decent power for a daily driven pickup😉 Take Care Mr. Vizard🙏🏼 ~ Adam ~ P.s. Being as you enjoyed my last cam video i figured i would add that I have another cam video coming out real soon with a plethora of information & examples that is going to introduce the internet to a conglomeration of more new information to bring about a greater & correct understanding of valve events and their effects... Mr. BT still gets a very small mention at the end of the vid for his incorrect theory about valve events... I cant let people continue to eat his bs, so at the end i have to at least let him acknowledge himself with his own words... lol
This reminds me of when I helped my brother fabricate a system & add on a turbo onto a mostly stock 1972 Datsun 510 1.6L (low tires & suspension, metal shim head gasket, hi-perf struts). This was around 1979 and turbos for cars was a somewhat novel concept (except the Turbo Corvair & Olds Jetfire). I was working as a tune-up tech at the time so I helped him with all the odd problems that would arise -- like carburetor vacuum secondaries getting stuck open during boost and the death rattle ping that would come-on as the boost kicked in. We added water injection the cheap way by getting a windshield washer bottle & connecting the washer motor to turn on when boost began with an intake manifold switch (he also used that to make a red light go on under the dash). That car was stupid fast -- and even with the cheap knock-off "water injection" it would still ping under boost -- but nowhere near as bad. When the bottle ran dry, the ping was worse than anything I ever heard. Soon after the turbo installation, he put in a 5spd overdrive -- and that made the car even more stupid-fast. It just seemed like the more load you put on the engine, the faster it went. I recall having my ass take chunks out of the passenger seat when he'd take it on "freeway cruises". He'd get it cruising at 55 and then floor it, it would take about 4 seconds for the boost to kick in, the ping would start about 2 seconds before that. Then the speedometer would shoot up to the 120 limit and keep going toward 0 again. He never wrecked it and never blew the engine, and sold it about 6 months later. Even back then pinging was described as highly destructive -- but I never personally saw it damage an engine back then. I think that since then the pistons may have been designed to make them much more susceptible to breaking ring lands than back then -- because that 510 made the most unGodly pinging that could be heard a block away (not so bad with the WI).
Here Mike Skidmore I have Snow Performance Water Injection on my 3208 Cat265 HP Diesel to reduce exhaust gas temps. I add Methanol in the winter then shut the system off. In the Summer can use 7 gallons of water per day
One of the best videos you've done David - read years ago that Saab used to use this on their competition turbo engines in the 70's. Makes you wonder why having developed engines to their current state that vehicle manufacturers haven't gone down this route, rather than scrapping them and pursuing the electric 'dream' bearing in mind the reduction in emissions and massive increase in economy possible.
This is a good question, nowadays in research it is about alternative fuels like hydrogen and ammonia in combustion engines to reduce emissions. However i bet with todays spark and direct injection technology it would be much viable to make combined petrol/diesel and steam engine, all the physics and logic is there to build one. Water injection could solve all the current issues from required infrastructure for different fuels/electricity and other issues such as toxicity (ammonia). Just by adding water tank to car and getting the waste heat into usable work! It for sure is not simple task, is there enough heat transfer/difference for the water vapour expand rapidly, would the wear on cylinder wall increase too much? It probably would need different engine block and cylinder head to work best to work as steam engine and somekind of thermocouple measurements for each combustion chamber/cylinder to control. It is for sure interesting idea that when working properly would increase effeciency, milage and could eliminate many issues with other alternatives
Well this is WWII tech and my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection... ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
28:1 with 80lbs of boost. Water injected, compound turbos. When the exhaust turns white, it's only using 10% fuel. 4500 hp and 5000lbs of torque. It's a combo of early WWII aircraft turbo diesel with nitrous injection and steam locomotives mixing in 10% diesel fuel. Methanol has been used for additional output longer than you have been around David.
I would like you to expand on this subject. You seem quite experienced and knowledgeable. I think Harry Ricardo, did a lot of tables for WWII planes. What you seem to be describing is a setup creating enough heat through compression to create a steam engine here. Build it here for us? Thanks for sharing. Very eye opening!!
Hi, I’m 52, I profess to really enjoying listening to you, I’ve always had respect for men with years and wisdom…I’d like to ponder doing this on my 2007 durango, my daily driver work truck…fuel is expensive in Canada, even in alberta at 1.40$ per litre
David Vizard is misleading you. the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel. We know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel.. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster . By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance. By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster. And by retarding the timing because the fuel igniting faster, more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke. Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal effici @mrdg the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel..we know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel.. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster . By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke. As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance. By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster. And by retarding the timing more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke. Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal efficiency / combustion efficiency of fuel.. Green vapour draw enhances combustion efficiency prove me wrong Mr. Vizard. .
All I can say is WOW!!! I will say I thoroughly injoyed this video!!! I don’t understand why this tech isn’t being taken advantage of. I n production vehicles.
Thank you David for proving something I’ve been doing for years Your totally right the tuning makes the difference and don’t use alcohol unless freezing is an issue I did have great results with nitromethane/methanol sprayed in conjunction with water methanol through a nitrous nozzle on a 14:1 motor cycle with ridiculous timing using a unconventional method to obtain optimum droplet size
In 1978 I bought a new Z28, Art Nolte Scottsdale automotive and I built a turbo system for it. I installed a Hob switch with a windshield washer container and modified squirter attached to the aircleaner. Mixture of water methanol. Activate at wide open throttle.
This is absolutely most accurate video i have ever seen on the subject of water injection period! I have been researching and testing straight water injection as well as up to 50% water/methanol injection and almost everything I have found about the subject can summarized right from this video, as well as some things i had not considered. One of those things being, the idea of elimination of a power stroke and addition of a steam stroke. Absolutely genius! Another is possibly using the direct injection system as a water injection instead of fuel for that cycle. Possibly also direct water injection into the cylinder for ultra high performance with ethanol e85 rail injection combined to produce a methanol power level with ethanol? Might need a but of nitro mixed in for that tho....LOL anyhow I just wanted to thank you for all the great information you continue to post on your channel!!! THANK YOU!!!
There was a turbo book from the 70s that talks about water injection. Artificial octane enhancer. Takes up space between the fuel/air and slows rate of combustion, helps carry heat out of the exhaust valve. When sprayed into the compressor of a turbo it increases adiabatic efficiency by about 25%. I have run water injection into a non intercooled TD VW and it increased boost at a much lower intake temp by about 25%.ran almost 40psi of boost on that engine. The water injection also cleaned up the smoke from the modified injection pump.
Listening to David once again, I rememeber from one of Eldred's comments. On WOT at 6000RPM, he squirted 6 litres of water in a minute without drama. Use a venturi and air pressure to suck water up and atomise it for use. Works very well if done right. The smaller the droplets the better it will work, hence using Metho or similar to breakdown surface tension, thus generating a finer mist. I used water down the carb throat as a decarb system. Cost a lot less than stripping an engine to decoke. TRY IT, YOU'LL LIKE IT!
I know years ago when I was taking to a old Ford Mech who worked at the ford factory and he also built airplane during WWII and he said that they used a gallon of water with a qt. of trany fluid mixed together, but they just poured it down the carb slowly to clean off the valve and the cylinder's. He said they use that at the ford plant if someone came in with a bunch of carbon build up, that's how they cleaned it out instead of tearing it apart to fix the problem. I did that with a 67 ford mustang with about 50,000 before I tore it done to check the bearing. After I tore it apart I could see all the cylinders and valves were completely carbon free with no build up at all.
I did this years ago on a 428 CJ Mustang with a oil furnace nozzle and a windshield washer pump . When I turned it on the idea of the engine went up a bit.
In terms of water droplet size, think about the use of water atomizer currently being used as a vaporizer in a kids room during low humidity winter nights. The vapor exits as a fog.
Excellent coverage of the subject, maybe a small note of the effect of volume change of liquid to vapor on the cylinder total pressure and flame speed vs compression ratio on spark timing could be expanded...
My first car, which I know you're quite familiar with, was a 1971 Capri 2000 (high school graduation gift). After climbing the ladder of Offenhauser Dual Port intake manifold plus headers>Offy DualPort intake with Holley 390 4bbl, I graduated to an Ak Miller Rajay turbo setup. While in college a mechanically gifted friend cobbled up a rudimentary water injection system using the factory windshield washer pump and nozzle shooting water down the secondary throat of the stock Weber 2V carb triggered by a Hobbs switch at WOT. I was able to essentially double my boost, I think up to 15-16 psi and that 2300 lb. car was quite fast.
Back in the mid-70s I had a 11 to 1 350 in my three-quarter ton Chevy truck and camper towed a heavy trailer at the same time. Edelbrock made a water injection kit that varied the water injected by manifold vacuum and engine ROM. The small box (brain) controlled the the water injection by turning on and varying the speed of the water pump to vary water flow. This worked out exceptionally well as without the water injection it would just detonate, to the point of making it undrivable on the premium pump gas available without a lot of 104 Real Lead additive. The only downside was if you use city water it would calcify the nozzle. Easy to clean as nozzle was in the air cleaner lid over the primary chole air horn in carb. But plumbed the water source into the camper water tank (30 gallons).In the San Diego area we could not go anywhere without going through mountains. When not towing it would run on 89 octane regular. This was with 39 degrees of total timing on a custom curved Mallory Dual point distributor. Truck had a all synchro 4 speed Sainaw with overdrive tranny, 456 gears 33" tire. To Vegas's 8and back running 65-85 mph it got 12-13 mpg towing. 3000 rpm in overdrive was 110 mph. Underload towing through the mountains I would use a gallon plus of water in 30 miles. Water is a lot cheaper than race gas or octane booster. This was old school with a 625 cfm vacuum secondary dual inlet Holley center pivot. It took quite a bit of time and patience to dial everything in. But that was also my business (Precision Carburation & Fuel Injection). It was truly a labor of love & learning. I have used Snow water Injection on my own and customer's vehicles with great results since then. Thank you David for spreading the gospel of water Injection. 42:33
Years ago I worked for an ICE research facility. We did a bit of work with hydrogen. Making this stuff burn clean was really difficult. We ended up with a system using direct injection of BOTH water and H2, through a single coaxial injector. It was a bit complex, but worked!
I've given quite a bit of thought to running two common rail injectors in each cylinder . One fuel, one water, and yes random, computer, controlled, firings and steam / cooling squirts . Also, much consideration of using the heat extraction as steam expansion . And yes, this is an expansion ( no pun ) of Bruce Crower's idea .
the trick would get to get a GDI pump that will put up with water. A few degrees after ignition, shoot in a micro-spritz of water and get a second power stroke. Along with all the cooling of the waste heat that would heat the radiator and exhaust pipe. The local Kia plant is close to my house and I always wanted to get a friend to seal a pump so I could look at doing that to my 454BBC jetboat. Turns out the federal gobment really frowns on 'liberating' free-trade parts that haven't been taxed. lol
i've heard of using a haltech controlled solenoid> mapped off gas injector signal duty cycles= to trigger water injector... samething as diy> 555timer&pwm circuits- for a few dollars👍
When I was 15 , a plumber-friend suggested brazing a tank onto the exhaust manifold of my old LIP-Vauxhall (first-car). It would have a copper-pipe flattened at the-end , going into the top of the-carb . It never eventuated but the steam-produced , was meant to work something like water-injection . In 1981, Yamaha produced the first 1-litre Japanese V-twin motorcycle (TR1 ) , the rear-carb had a larger main-jet to cool the-hotter rear-cylinder , I haven't heard of it before (I still ride it ) , I increased that plugs heat-range by 1, to make the rear-plug last-longer, it all seems to work ok . I wonder if 'Vape-Technology' could be used to introduce steam into engines ? ..I could do-with a bit-more 'Go' in the old-girl . Dave NZ
David thanks for the great information!!! I too have been using and experimenting with water injection for fuel economy on my lean-burn 30:1 A/F ratio 4G63 turbo engine. I pick up some key performance points that I will be adding to my build.
Hello, I am working on a project involving a diesel engine, and I would like to test water injection. My theory is to inject the water after the intercooler. In my opinion, injecting water before the turbo is not a good idea because the turbo has a harder time spooling up, and moreover, water tends to condense in the intercooler despite being well atomized. Additionally, it is definitely advantageous to have steam on the hot side of the turbo to assist in spooling it up at low RPMs.
2:58 N.A.C.A. - National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics The US agency predecessor to NASA, they published so much amazing research in the 1920s and 1930s regarding engine tuning, propeller design, and especially aerodynamics for everything from intake ducts to radiators to control surfaces. They even released detailed plans for specific wing shapes (NACA airfoils), research that benefited planes like the P51 Mustang.
I use a dry cell type HHO Hydrogen Generator on my 1999 Ford Ranger's 2.5 Liter 4 cylinder engine, which boosts mileage tremendously. This motor require 87 octane ONLY, any more damages the engine according to the repair and owner';s manuals. I have run this for 3 years now and have not had any major problem using it. Matter of fact, this has paid for itself many times over during this time of price gouging by Big Oil. I'm not going for raw power, but range (Better Mileage) and reliability. This engine currently has just shy of 226000 miles on it and this little truck handles the mountains of Southeastern Kentucky like nothing is there. BTW The Ranger is my daily driver. I built this truck from junkyard wrecks. Cost maybe around $500. All I have left to do is give it a decent paint job. I'm looking hard at University Of Kentucky Blue. I do not have a lot of money to work with to start with so I do what I can with what I have.
did your hho kit require a gizmo to trick the O2 sensor,,, or do you drive without its function/engine light on no problems.... (in newer cars>the leaner cleaner> exhaust sensor tells the ecu computer to add more gas=worse mileage)
AS A FORMER DEMOLITION EXPERT, A CHEMICAL ENGINEER AND ENERGY RESEARCHER, I UTTERLY SALUTE YOU THAT YOU HAVE AUTHORITATIVELY SEPARATED DETONATION, DEFLAGRATION AND COMBUTSION!!!
[aka air and fuel should NEVER EVER EVER DETONATE in an engine!!! (aka an actual "explosion")]
I may, some day, should I advance my trucks to the point of high performance I JUST MIGHT use water injection.
Right now, however, I am working on 'external' combustion cycles.
BUT!!!
NONETHELESS!!!
I 100% SUPPORT...
This IMMENSE WISDOM you give people!!!
NACA - National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. One of the few government programs actually providing a public benefit at no additional charge. I read Riccardo's work a long time ago. It is amazing how much water can be injected, and how much impact it has on cylinder temperatures because it has such a high heat of vaporization.
I just found your channel. I bought your books in the 80's I'm glad to see you are still sharing your knowledge!
Back in the late seventies when the octane level was dropping in the California fuel, I had an engine that ran a 10.3:1 compression ratio in 180 psi cylinder pressure..... And 91 octane was not it's friend. It was a company called spearco that was based down in Santa Monica if I recall correctly that built a water vapor injector that I purchased and hooked up...... My dad was an aerospace engineer who turned me on to the idea..... It was very simple simply using the vacuum of the engine to create water vapor and suck it in through the base of the carburetor...... It worked excellent and I still have that device they sitting in my attic
Well break it out, patent it and share it with the world.......
On engine masters they had similar thing meth injection, conclusion water don't burn, so lost hp, so it's crap
@@alltherpm Yeah because they are GOD'S with their super sponsored paid for content 🤣😂🤣
@@samuelmartin2817 it's actually very simple..... Basically they took a glass mayonnaise jar, took a piece of copper line and ran it from the lid to about an inch from the bottom and then a second line attached to the lid barely protruding through that was quite a bit larger.... About a quarter of an inch..... This hooked up to your vacuum line and as the engine would run and pull vacuum it created a bubbling effect inside the jar with the water and the condensation would get sucked in by The collector at the top and get sucked into the engine. About the same moisture content as if it was raining.
I can tell you this. But it definitely worked because I was able to kick the time and almost back up to where I had it when I could get 98 octane
@alltherpm it's not garbage, it's technology that dates back to ww2 and is used every day.
Dave, I'm running a 2.5L Dodge 4 cyl. with factory Mitso. turbo at 17 PSI. ( WOT ) with an intercooler. I added a Volvo cold start gasoline injector about 6 inches from the throttle plate, but it runs too rich now. Your explanation about water injection has just opened up a whole new arena of possibilities for me. I truly appreciate the effort you made to explain all this to us DIY people. Thanks so much.
Were you lean before adding the injector? On crude efi systems that are hard to tune, adding an injector can sometimes work, but you’d usually use the same type as the other 4 and wire it to one of the existing ones to get a 25% bump. Otherwise tuning should be the first solution and/or going larger on the injectors.
@@_..-.._..-.._ I first added +20% injectors, which allowed boost increase from stock 11 psi to 15 psi. That is the tripping point of starting to go too lean. To go higher, the 5th injector was added. A pressure switch brings on the 5th injector above 15 psi. I tried adding restrictor orifice to the 5th injector, but it is still too rich. Now I think I will have to reduce fuel pressure to the extra injector. It will be trial and error.
And my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection...
ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
You will need to remove some fuel, with water or water methanol injection. rule of thumb to start, If you need 10 pounds of fuel per unit of time, use 9 pounds of fuel and 1 pound of water.
Very nice! Are you running the slushbox 3 speed auto, or did it come with a manual transmission?
My 89 LeBaron 2.5 w/ mitsu turbo pushes through the converter beyond 13 psi. It's so ass. On partial throttle, it howls like an injured wolf. I'll be using Vizard's theory behind my tuning, after I swap the Getrag A555 and install water/meth. 20 psi, here I come!
Good luck on your build 👍
Years ago i had a 80 Camaro z28 and it was a dog lol . So i raised the compression ratio to 10.9 , cast iron heads . Black jack headers . Com cam 292 solid lift . Elbrock water injection. When i used the water injection that engine ran pretty decent .. with out the water it would ping its self to bits . I knew that water injection was used in WW2 . I remember how clean the cylinder was when i pulled the heads to have them angle milled after running water injection ..Never thought about using soluble oil , good idea . Really appreciate your videos sir
I've always been curious about avoiding carbon deposits in the compression chamber using petrol , would you say it's equivalent to engines that run on methanol?
Years ago I picked up a copy of your "How to Build a Max Horsepower Chevy Small Block on a Budget" book and read it cover to cover. As soon as your video popped up, I knew who were and subscribed. I want to say THANK YOU for sharing all of your knowledge and experience!
This gentleman has probably forgotten more about engines than most of us will ever learn. I love how he puts the cookies on the bottom shelf, so everyone can understand his lectures. Keep up the great work! I do wonder if water injection could also reduce the need for intercoolers on turbocharged/supercharged applications.
National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics.
You give me joy. That sounded like a wild idea, but you have convinced me it could work. I love your enthusiasm, and your extensive development and research background shows at every moment.
Holy crap. I was scratching my head about water injection when I was 10 or 11 years old. Currently 52. I need to step back and come back to this one. Much appreciated and bringing back memories
You got me a bit emotional sir
My father was an industrial engineer at G.E. in Ft. Wayne's bomber engine plant, turbo/supercharger divisions and was one of a handful of engineers responsible for quality production. I agree with you whole heartidly about the P47 Thunderbolt. Republic Aircraft built some of our most durable aircraft. The Pratt and Whitney R2800 radial was a great engine. Turbo/superchargers were needed to gain altitude/speed to get higher than the Germain fighters.
Thank you sir
If I remember correctly the thunderbolt had a water/methanol injection system?
@@LeachimSagrav333
Yes, Water/Methanol was used on the P-47 for "Wartime Emergency Power" it had a toggle-switch labeled "WEP".
Early on it was enough for five minutes, later for over ten minutes.
The first fighter with a war emergency setting was the Spitfire. It had a wire that stopped the throttle from going above 6psi of boost. If you pushed thru the wire, you got 12psi of boost. This was after the US supplied the Brits with 100 octane fuel, and they could run higher boost. But the engine had to be serviced after the wire was broken until they beefed up the Merlin later on.
@@TheJustinJ nice👍
Sorry. Still inferior to the Pomme engines!
I really like water injection. I ran a 6 cylinder Holden in the 90’s with an old Edelbrock water injection system (the old red ecu system with 3 trim pots and a crude map sensor built in). It was terrible to tune and the water nozzle was just a brass tube blanked at one end with 2x60 thou holes towards the end. I nearly gave up on it but one night, I went on a late night drive, the planet’s and stars must have aligned or something because this thing just came alive like it never had before and after having a load of fun for around half an hour, the power dropped off again. It dropped off because water injection ran out of water. I just left settings as they were but adjusted it to come on later in the rev range but it never worked as well. It was a tad frustrating because the water ran out so quickly. I still have it now somewhere in the garage.
Well done for highlighting why WI is shit. It's unreliable, you have to fill the tank up every five minutes, it's heavy and people become rapidly bored of it.
Possibly be from the engine not coming up to temperature before the injection, or air fuel mixture being off. Should put an O2 sensor on and figure it out that way
@@michaelatkin9649 yes, I agree the temperature not up to running temp. The scale readings on the adjustable trimpots weren’t accurate as far as I can remember and they were very sensitive to any adjustment. It was a constant trial and error thing. On the trimpots, 3 of them, There was an rpm range, a 4,6 or 8cyl setting and a water volume setting. It was like trying to tune an old, worn carb with air leaks everywhere, you could have it right, with the engine at operating temp one day and next day, it wasn’t right under the same conditions next. When it was right though, it was awesome.
My daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection...
ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
wOw the 90's. Tech was still being born and reborn relearned. 2023 = still is hahahah. i am looking forward to doing this to a big Alfa dan mahle engine when it comes out in 2024! or after that sometime.
This finally explains to me why the Pratt and Whitney R-2800C in the P47M and later thunderbolts burn less fuel at War Emergency Power with water injection vs Full continuous power with out. The water injection allows for a much leaner fuel mixture especially with an air cooled engine and that with the expansion ratio added from the water increases cylinder pressure with less fuel.
Excellent Video! 👍
Awesome lesson. Thank you for your openness with your incredible knowledge and experience. I've run 20+ psi on 9.5:1 compression 6 and 8 cyl engines with water only injection, no intercooling and pump gas. Economy was never the goal. It's amazing how little performance guys use such a time proven thing.
Yessir you hit nail on head. David Vizard swears by water injection...even runs it on 87 octane with high compression motors.
distilled water? How do you pump and inject it , technically?
@@jamesmedina2062 Snow Performance makes systems for carbs.
Had mine set for 3/4 throttle and above it truly does work. Use water and windshield washer fluid, 50/50.
Simple and cheap will also keep the carbon off the back of your valves and really resists pinging
@@gordocarbosir i have high compression, turbocharged motor in arizona and I’m thinking of running the carb plate. Do you have the shear one or the regular and how do you make sure the carb comes on at 3/4 throttle?
@@davecaresforyou7606 You mean water injection? Mine worked off a microswitch you can adjust when it comes on
Thanks for posting. Im a disabled gearhead, so bench racing these theories is most enjoyable. My next build god willing will employ much of what I have learned.
The tow car was faster. Lol
God bless you!
Mr. Vizard is such a wealth of info, thank you
Hi David.
I use methanol water injection in my bmw, it is the best I have known for the supercharged engine, I use a compression ratio of 9.75 to 1 with 2 maps of 2 and 2.5 bar.
I use 50% water and methanol.
I have the injector placed about 25cm before the throttle, the injector and the module are all homemade.
Best regards
It really works, almost lost my engine when I had a wiring problem and it didnt inject, thank you Jesus for knock retard. That is the downside of relying on a minimally engineered product like cheap Snow and AEM systems.
Could you please share your homemade wmi system, and the pump used?
I have been using water/methanol injection for well over 40 years, in both NA and turbocharged engines. I started using it after reading about it in Hugh MacInnes' book on turbocharging. The results have been excellent without exception, from the simplest home made system to more sophisticated variable flow systems. Glad to see someone with Mr. Vizard's experience and wisdom addressing the subject. Some say that it is a bad idea because if you run out of fluid you'll grenade your engine. The remedy for that is to pay attention and make sure you have enough fluid available for the requirement at hand. I currently use it on a turbocharged engine running boost levels way too high for this era's crappy gasoline, and with absolutely no detonation problems. Thumbs up for water injection.
So are you saying I could put that great big Detroit 92 series turbocharger on my 8.1 l Silverado push the compression way high with water injection and greatly improve thermal efficiency??
BMW has a system which condense the water vapor from exhaust gases and return the water to the water injection system reservoir automatically
@@flappingflight8537 Did not know that but seems probable as they used water methanol injection on aircraft engines during WWII so they have 'some experience' (FW190, et.al.)
@@flappingflight8537 NACA report 756 from 1943 addresses this.
But it didnt work very well --- for airplanes at least.
@@tomstulc9143Thats what i was thinking too. Did you tune your 8.1 i looked at the 5.3 and 6.0 stock tune and there almost the same gm left lots of room at upper rmp range got my 5.3 to 6,500 and trans to downshift sooner still going strong at 270,000 miles.
I saw the title and immediately said water. I then flashed back to reading Performance with Economy, I wasn't even in high school yet. I really do appreciate you and Andy doing this project, the knowledge still applies today. You all have a fantastic weekend!
One of my favorite purchases in the last year was that book, ive read through it several times during my fuel mpg Project StRanger
This is actually WWII tech and my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection...
ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
Water injection back n the day Hor Rod mag, drops of water through carb 👍
I remember reading about water injection in some GM technical briefs over 30 years ago. Fascinating stuff.
Water injection is very common in the diesel tractor pulling world,its been used successfully for about 50 years now.with a 3 stage compound turbo system using 4 chargers 300 lbs of boost was quite common at one time.water is injected in the atmosphere side of the compressors then between each stage and in port finally.find a super stock diesel puller and itll amaze you at the volume of h2o thats used in a 330 foot distance.
Where can I speak to you about this
I remember back in the 80s hot rod was pushing vapor injection, which was a passive system that used an aquarium stone and a valve to adjust the vapor
That was Smokey Unick. I think he did a Vega first then maybe a Dodge Omni. He was getting a claimed 100mp with only a 20% drop in power. Then I never heard about it again. Did his experiments fail? If so, why wasn't a reason given for the failure so that other engineers could try to solve any problems that were discovered? Or did Smokey sell the concept with a "Non-Disclosure Agreement" NDA clause? $$$???
Brian Crower made a modified Briggs and Stratton engine which ran with a 6 stroke cycle with a "steam stroke" as you described. It worked quite well from what I remember reading about it.
Where can I find this study?
I knew this would be about water injection. So glad David is on board. Yes, you dilute the air charge a little bit resulting in less HP/psi of air, but you can significantly open the tuning window for a given fuel. Im doing a dual fuel setup for my drag and drive build. 80/20 meth/water in the secondary fuel system. Blending it in where needed.
On board ? Lol
@@lukesimeon5756 as in "supports water injection"
My dad was doing water injection on a 235 straight 6 Chevy engine at least in the early 70s if not before. Not making a comparison just saying that some of these ideas have been around and maybe a lot of us had forgotten them. Of course this fella here has improved upon them
@@CAROLDDISCOVER-1983 I know more old timers that will run avgas or c16 on the street than I do ones that support or care about the science of water injection. Most don't even believe it works. Same for my generation but now it's all about e85, even if it means driving 2 hrs one way to fill a 55 gal drum and drive it back. I have had great success with water injection myself. Just glad to see someone like David Vizard showing some appreciation that's all.
@scrapmetal_sleepers420 I'm glad your trying to clean up your statements cuz David Vizards knowledge of the industry is so vast that he has forgotten more than most will ever know
Mr. Vizard, That is one of the most interresting video's you've come up with. Thank you
Back in the mid 70s had a buddy that was an aerospace engineer, he had a Ford F-150 pickup truck 390 Fe turboed with water injection system he made. Garrett turbo came from a work project. When you get on the throttle the engine would PING. The more water that was injected the ping ping would go away and you could keep your foot planted into the throttle. Truck was a screamer on the Los Angeles freeways
Dad bought a 67 Mercury Montcalm in 69. Three kids coming into their teens and a new baby did not fit the Valiant too good. The Merc had a 2V 390. Coming off a light the marbles would rattle 2 or 3 times and then it was good. I believe spark plug location was not the best.
I used to run an Edelbrock Vara-jection water injection system on a Ford 390 with 12:1 compression at 4500 feet altitude back in the early 80's, when properly tuned it made good power and the water would absolutely stop any detonation running 87 octane fuel, fuel economy with that engine was amazing, I think I have the Vara-jection still, I hope so because this makes me want to play with it again.
could you use that setup for a daily driver car everything I have been seeing on RUclips has been for racing only.
That didn't happen to be in Bishop ca. did it?
@@kengilliskg That was on a daily driver, a 3/4 ton 4x4 truck, it was the only way it could be timed correctly without running avgas, the compression ended up that high somewhat by accident using 2bbl heads with 4 bbl flattop pistons.
@@tomschultz2833 Nope, Utah.
Did you run a radical cam profile or stock cam profile? I want to try building a 14-16:1 big block and use water injection like he mentioned at the 17:03 mark. I wonder at what rpm I could drive on 87 before having to use the water injection.
First of all, thank you David for covering this for the rest of us.
I bought and read a few of your books way back in the early 80s, when I decided to build my first turbocharged car, a 2.3 pinto powered Capri, which I cobbled together a water for.
My water injection system was crude, but effective.
After watching this video I've decided to try water injection again on my turbo
Mustang. Thanks for the insight.
My father tried water injection on the 1967 440 GTX. He use the windshield washer with a spider made from AC capillary tubing and mounted over the carburetor. It did reduce detonation but was hard to regulate and only lasted a short while.
I've been interested in water injection for a long time myself. I have a 2011 Ford Flex with the Ecoboost 3.5 V6 in it. I got the engine tuned a while back (since removed so I can go back to running 87), and before I installed the tune, I used FORScan to look at a bunch of different stuff like boost and fuel enrichment and the like. Something that surprised me is that I regularly saw fuel enrichment as low as 10.25:1 and on a couple rare occasions it dipped below 10 on the factory tune! I was blown away. No wonder this thing is such a pig on fuel for any kind of driving except highway. They're doing crazy amounts of fuel enrichment under boost, and I'm assuming it's because it's a non-EGR engine, and so they have to rely entirely on fuel enrichment to cool the combustion to deal with NOx. What's funny is that the performance tune never got below 11:1 even though it was running significantly higher boost numbers. Once I learned all of this and read up on the forums about water/meth injection, I had the idea to have my tuner make me up an 87 octane fuel economy tune and just run water injection without the methanol. If we're going for MPG's, there's no sense in pouring more fuel down the hatch, so I figured just water to cool the charge would be enough. Not to mention the cleaning ability for the intake valves which is such a huge problem on these DI engines. Now that I've listened to your presentation here I'm even more convinced that this is a good idea.
Ya i notice on 5.3 silverados form 99 to 03 13:1 at idle to 2000 RPM. I heard its so the catalytic converter heats up and burns everything for proper emissions. So my tune i got it 16:1 at idle 14:7 at 2000 RPMs and 12:1 at 6000 RPMS.
AFR's below 11.5:1 on 93 octane stock turbo applications are specifically for cooling the cats, not the engine, in nearly all cases.
I experimented with water injection in the '80's with a mopar 383, I kept adding water (more is better theory) until I bent a rod, the one thing I do remember is how clean the spark plugs were, they looked brand new everytime I checked them, thank you David for posting this, it answered a lot of questions I had back then.
WWII tech and my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection...
ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
I agree completely I have read many of your books and bought many of them I tried many experiments even when gasoline was less than $0.80 a gallon for 87 octane I did follow a lot of your recommendations your recommendations were always spot-on
Thank you Mr. Vizard for everything you have taught me over the years with your books and videos!
Had 63 Buick that had a factory turbo with water alcohol injection. But it only had 2 gallon container in the engine compartment.
My most favorite video from you guys yet. Such great info. Also really loved your mentioning of the WWII P47 Thundetbolt and your correct assessment regarding how good it really was!
you just have to love this guy, his knowledge of things is unbelievable, just as someone else said, he probably has forgotten more than we will ever know! he just fascinates me, i love how he takes everything to the limit, thats awesome, right on keep it up we all love ya!
I’m late to the ballgame, but as a student of military aviation history of WWII, the comments regarding the P-47 have merit. The -51 was certainly a good airplane, but its arrival in the 8th Air Force didn’t occur in force until early 1944. The P-38 did all the heavy lifting with long range bomber escort up until that time salvaging day light bombing. The P-47 was range limited but had several advantages in air-to-air (highest roll rate and good in a dive) and tac-air (excellent dive bomber, rugged, excellent firepower). By the time Big Week came along, 38s and 47s bled the Luftwaffe, and pilots in those groups went from green to veteran pilots and the Luftwaffe suffered attrition amongst their veterans as a consequence. Arnold took over from Eaker and replaced the -38 (which along with a photo recce Spit were the FIRST fighters over Berlin, not the -51) with the 51 for long range escort. PLUS, he released these now veteran pilots from close cover escort so they could hunt the Luftwaffe. Therefore, the 51 never had to play defense against the Luftwaffe’s best. Whereas 38 and 47 drivers (short range escort for the 47) did whilst Eaker ran the 8th. The P-47, subsequently, did much of the heavy lifting in the ETO, and the type scored heavily during Big Week which broke the Luftwaffe’s back. That was in March of 1944. The P-51 pilots scored heavily during a time in which the Luftwaffe was broken and Air Superiority already established. Not to gainsay the 51 at all, but the P-47 should not be overshadowed. It was a far superior weapon for tactical aerial operations (as was the P-38 for that matter) and once it got it’s four blade prop and could actually climb, it was every bit the dog fighter as the P-51 when it’s pilot stuck to energy tactics. Anecdotally, I’ve spoken with a good number of pilots who transitioned from the P-38 into the P-51 and a couple who flew the -51 after flying the -47. ALL of them preferred their original mounts, surprisingly - even the P-38 drivers in spite of the problems with that aircraft in the ETO.
Groovy shit.
Great episode. Please give us more about water injection. Thanks
This, is the conversation I've always been interested in. Every time I try to bring up the efficiency, all anyone wants to do is turn the conversation to there's no substitute for cubic inches.
"Yes, well, I'll pour some water in my engine, and you can pour some more cubic inches into yours, and I'll meet you at the tree."
i remember always going to your articles in MM&FF way before i looked at the centerfold cars so i could learn more, same with Richard Holdener's articles. so nice that you guys have a platform you can go more in depth with on here. i need this man to build me a high compression LS1 that gets like 70mpg and makes 500hp. lol
When fuel was horrible my dad installed water injection on his 1974 F250 with a 390. Detonation was so bad at the time and the water injection that was just a squirter that ran off a window washer pump and tank. It was above the carburetor and worked at at least half throttle to wide open. It killed detonation immediately and you could feel the power.
Thank you Mr. Vizard, you are helping me build a draw through turbo SBC in my garage! Your videos have been incredibly helpful and prevented this guy from making mistakes.
i always think about draw trrugh turbo setup, wouldint it draw oil of turbo seal?
@@gedas3419 Nope, because is making boost.
@@gedas3419 Throttle body doesn't really need to be in front of a turbo in a carb, it can be behind it. Then there would be no vacuum in the compressor.
@@unleavenedkaraiteplus3412 most of the time it doesn't
@@gedas3419 The turbo might need an extra seal if the carb is in front of it,
as the turbo would be subjected to the fuel spray from the carb, and full manifold vacuum.
The Corvair turbo (non ball bearing) had that extra seal. I ran one back in the 70s...
Adding an intercooler to the system would get kinda spooky as well.
I’m going to test out water injection on my mostly stock, low compression, LS motor. I will make my own nozzles and see how big a droplet size is best for my application. I can make the water injection turn on easily with a WOT switch and I will modify my timing table to increase the timing under WOT conditions only. We will see how much power I can gain. Thanks for the video, you are always inspiring me to do things that I might not otherwise!
I remember in my early days of mechanical school, that water injection was used in some WW2 bombers at take off to remove reduce detonation and to keep the combustion chamber clean as well, if I'm not mistaken it is used on the B-52 at take off as well either to clean the chamber or keep the temperature in check.
If in a B52, which is a jet and not piston engine, it would be for cooling but also to increase the mass of the jet exhaust, creating more thrust. Not sure if it does use water injection though, I’ll take your word for it.
@@gordonborsboom7460 look up WITO, or water injection take off. The difference in exhaust is interesting.
go buy a tesla and consign this old fossil to design titanium zimmers and carbon fibre commode pans
and give him a part in the simpsons
just kidding i hve a carbureted volvo t5 turbo blow thru 2 inch su but left in the injector rail for future messing
it runs like a peach
and scotty kilmer says carbs dont work on 5 pot motors
Not Even Close... It is an A Cheap and Amazing But Very Overlooked Solution to Many Problems in the Combust Chambers. Thanks for Sharing
David, I thought I knew a lot about water injection, a lot of which came from your Performance with Economy book. How wrong was I. I will have to watch this again, many times, to even partially absorb some of the information. Thank you for a totally enlightening and entertaining video.
Terry from Australia.
in the late 70s driving a 66 283 automatic Bellaire we were getting better than 25 miles per gallon average driving from Illinois to Maryland and back.
All because of water-methanol injection we were playing with. The problem was finding water when we filled up the gas tank😂 on the trips. As a machinist water soluble cutting oils worked perfect keeping things from rusting. Amazing what college kids will do to save gas money.
71 302 Torino, C4 , 24 mpg daily drive to and from Seminole co, to SeaWorld and to my job . Wore out two transmissions first was factory and 145, they rebuilt it before they knew me ( was the mom in laws) and it lasted 35k and I had a friend who built it. Never burned oil .
I regard you in the highest respect Mr. Vizard. Thank you for your time 👍
Thank you Mr Vizard! We appreciate you sharing your knowledge and insights. Really amazing stuff, makes me wonder how much good information has and will be lost due to not getting shared. Super exciting to think MPG is possible as you describe. I am inspired to start planning a maximum MPG build. Thanks again and keep sharing what you can for us who need to think outside the box. Bravo!
"tow car was faster than the race car"
Love it !!! 😁
Mr Vizard Thank you for this video. I built a 496 8-71 blown engine for my boat. The engine has a blower shop 4 plate billet intercooler and I incorporated a direct port water meth injection system below the intercooler. My goal is to have it run 15 lbs of boost on 91 octane. The water meth system has a progressive controller and can be tuned with a boost curve. After watching your video I have to ask if taking out the methanol in my system would be a benefit. It sure would cut down in costs as well as not having to change the tune on the engine. I will be taking it to dyno when I get past all of my customer obligations.
I built a NA 572 for customer and we had it Dynoed at Westech. The engine did not have a detonation problem when running normally. So one would argue why use the water methanol. I installed a direct port system as well on this engine. With no other changes it picked up an additional 15 hp. The intended purpose of the water meth was to use it for the nitrous enrichment. Steve Brule commented that I was trying to band aid a problem. The engine has a Hogan sheet metal EFI intake and is run off a Holley dominator ecu. I plumbed a Nitrous express direct port unit and jetted it for 300 hp. It is a dry system with the enrichment coming form the engines fuel injectors. Steve talked me out of this and wanted to run race gas. The customer was there with me and since I don't own the engine I went along with Steve's decision. Now that I have watched your video I'm curious if I could have pulled it off with the water injection. Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks BK
Highly thought provoking and informative. Amongst your best. Much thanks!
What a great video! As both a aviation maintenance student and a performance engine builder and enthusiast it benefited me greatly! You’re one awesome dude, DV! You really know your stuff
David Vizard is misleading you.
the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel.
We know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel..
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly.
To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster .
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke.
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance.
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster.
And by retarding the timing because the fuel igniting faster, more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke.
Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal effici @mrdg the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel..we know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel..
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly.
To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster .
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke.
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance.
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster.
And by retarding the timing more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke.
Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal efficiency / combustion efficiency of fuel..
Green vapour draw enhances combustion efficiency prove me wrong Mr. Vizard. .
@@brettjasonheadinventor I don't believe he has to. I'm no expert and though water does in fact not improve combustion of fuel, as you've pointed out, the way we are using it in ICE's, we don't need it to, so I don't get your point. Also, speeding up the burn significantly would make it an explosion, a.k.a. detonation, a.k.a. ping, and it's horrible for the engine. The reason we have advance in the ignition timing, other than in normal, proper tuning, is due to increased RPM providing decreased time for a complete burn, so we advance it to get back that time. If we do not advance, way less efficiency and power.
In short, too much advance = damaged engine, not enough advance = horrible efficiency, power, economy and emissions.
To increase efficiency we need to burn the air/fuel mixture more completely, more efficiently, which is not the same as burning it faster, though as long as it doesn't detonate, faster could be better. That's where the water comes is as though it certainly doesn't improve the burn of the air/fuel mixture, it also does not harm it, slow it down, etc. It helps to control it, to stabilize it, by keeping it from detonating. It does this in a number of ways, from cooling the intake charge (which also improves the density) to helping to cool the exhaust valves, another common source of detonation.
I'm not certain if I'm simply misunderstanding what you wrote, or if some of it is just wrong. Hoping you can explain things more clearly as I do not want to misunderstand you.
@@nYdGeo what you said is what been taught and practiced. Its all rubbish. It's what they want you to believe.
Vizard won't reply as it will destroy his understanding of chemical combustion and his knowledge of internal combustion engine tuning.
.To simply explain ...
When combustion is complete only CO2 and water is produced. To achieve complete combustion, the fuel/ air mixture must be thoroughly mixed and completely burnt when ignited.
Therefore the fuel/air mixture must burn at such a fast rate, that no advancing of ignition timing is required at any rpm.
Achieving this would mean the thermal efficiency increases, leaving no unburnt or partially combusted fuel. Nothing except for producing CO2 and water.
Complete combustion equals more power and less fuel waste and less emissions. Less black soot, which is partially burnt fuel.
We know complete combustion doesn't occur as modern engines require emissions control systems to reburn the waste fuel and old engines and Vizard engine tuning knowledge produces soot all because of incomplete combustion.
Green vapour draw systems enhances combustion efficiency. Reduces fuel waste and emissions..we know it works as there is less soot in the exhaust tail pipe.( Plus from emission testing).
I have offered millions of dollars to anyone who can debunk the system.
It's seem David Vizard or any other so called expert, won't accept the challenge. We have the proof it works.
@@nYdGeo I repied to your comment thrugh my Green Vapour Draw Systems account. we would be happy to send you a vapor draw kit to prove David Vizard is wrong..
@@brettjasonheadinventor I might be interested in exploring this with you if I could find anything whatsoever on your green vapor draw system besides some RUclips videos. Once again, I believe you misunderstand me. I cannot believe in nor deny the effectiveness of the green vapor draw system because I can find zero information on it. What I can tell you, and I'm pretty damn confident about this, is that what you posted about water injection is incorrect. It has been used for like a century in numerous applications, with spectacular results. That said, it does not mean that your system is not better, more effective, etc. Again, I would be very interested in learning about the system you're promoting, but I cannot find any information about it at all. That presents a bit of a problem, yes?
I suspect that maybe you're generating green hydrogen and using that to enhance the efficiency of conventional, petroleum fueled ICE's, but that's totally a guess.
I say this every time but thank you so much Mr.David for everything you share I enjoy and appreciate it
The ideas from the 70's were the best,thank you for your contributions
30's and 40's
This is big. I'm sure some guys will pursue this now that DV has given them the road map to follow.
This is decades old technology/techniques.
@@DrewLSsix I don't believe it's well known in the automotive circles. And I don't believe the engineering has been done to optimize it.
I was fitting turbos from the early 70,s mainly Holden red 6,s and running 20lbs and up on stock component motors, with water injection using Weber idle jets to regulate the amount and modded dizzy to suit with almost unbelievable results.. I also use drip method water injection on many motors for the cleaning value.. NOW as to your video I thank you so much,,, but i feel to get the best from it i will need to watch it AGAIN...and AGAIN Eddie Australia
I am amazed at what I just learned. My understanding of water injection is not complete & I think I will have to watch this a few times. Thank you for being you.
DV, Great information!! Back in the late 80's to early 90's my grandfather who was a physicist & engineer for GM long ago, had a daily driven 1981 chevy k20 that had a 400sbc w/ aluminum heads that was running water injection, it had a 6-71blower on top of it and it was on the side of having fairly high compression, even though i was a well educated child at the time i dont recall the psi of boost that was made or what the compression ratio was but if i recall im pretty sure it had to be somewhere around 12.0:1-13.5:1 and ran on 87 octane, making around 700hp without breaking a sweat... there were alot of people in complete awe of how that truck worked... Thats decent power for a daily driven pickup😉
Take Care Mr. Vizard🙏🏼
~ Adam ~
P.s. Being as you enjoyed my last cam video i figured i would add that I have another cam video coming out real soon with a plethora of information & examples that is going to introduce the internet to a conglomeration of more new information to bring about a greater & correct understanding of valve events and their effects...
Mr. BT still gets a very small mention at the end of the vid for his incorrect theory about valve events... I cant let people continue to eat his bs, so at the end i have to at least let him acknowledge himself with his own words... lol
Sounds like an awesome truck!!! And a whole lotta fun!!!
This reminds me of when I helped my brother fabricate a system & add on a turbo onto a mostly stock 1972 Datsun 510 1.6L (low tires & suspension, metal shim head gasket, hi-perf struts). This was around 1979 and turbos for cars was a somewhat novel concept (except the Turbo Corvair & Olds Jetfire). I was working as a tune-up tech at the time so I helped him with all the odd problems that would arise -- like carburetor vacuum secondaries getting stuck open during boost and the death rattle ping that would come-on as the boost kicked in. We added water injection the cheap way by getting a windshield washer bottle & connecting the washer motor to turn on when boost began with an intake manifold switch (he also used that to make a red light go on under the dash). That car was stupid fast -- and even with the cheap knock-off "water injection" it would still ping under boost -- but nowhere near as bad. When the bottle ran dry, the ping was worse than anything I ever heard. Soon after the turbo installation, he put in a 5spd overdrive -- and that made the car even more stupid-fast. It just seemed like the more load you put on the engine, the faster it went. I recall having my ass take chunks out of the passenger seat when he'd take it on "freeway cruises". He'd get it cruising at 55 and then floor it, it would take about 4 seconds for the boost to kick in, the ping would start about 2 seconds before that. Then the speedometer would shoot up to the 120 limit and keep going toward 0 again. He never wrecked it and never blew the engine, and sold it about 6 months later. Even back then pinging was described as highly destructive -- but I never personally saw it damage an engine back then. I think that since then the pistons may have been designed to make them much more susceptible to breaking ring lands than back then -- because that 510 made the most unGodly pinging that could be heard a block away (not so bad with the WI).
Here
Mike Skidmore
I have Snow Performance Water Injection on my 3208 Cat265 HP Diesel to reduce exhaust gas temps. I add Methanol in the winter then shut the system off. In the Summer can use 7 gallons of water per day
One of the best videos you've done David - read years ago that Saab used to use this on their competition turbo engines in the 70's.
Makes you wonder why having developed engines to their current state that vehicle manufacturers haven't gone down this route, rather than scrapping them and pursuing the electric 'dream' bearing in mind the reduction in emissions and massive increase in economy possible.
This is a good question, nowadays in research it is about alternative fuels like hydrogen and ammonia in combustion engines to reduce emissions. However i bet with todays spark and direct injection technology it would be much viable to make combined petrol/diesel and steam engine, all the physics and logic is there to build one.
Water injection could solve all the current issues from required infrastructure for different fuels/electricity and other issues such as toxicity (ammonia). Just by adding water tank to car and getting the waste heat into usable work!
It for sure is not simple task, is there enough heat transfer/difference for the water vapour expand rapidly, would the wear on cylinder wall increase too much? It probably would need different engine block and cylinder head to work best to work as steam engine and somekind of thermocouple measurements for each combustion chamber/cylinder to control. It is for sure interesting idea that when working properly would increase effeciency, milage and could eliminate many issues with other alternatives
Well this is WWII tech and my daily driver in the 1960's was the 1962 Olds Jetfire with stock turbocharger and stock water/methanol injection...
ruclips.net/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/видео.html
One smart man learn new information every time love David!
I have 4 Gatorade bottles evaporating water gas and antifreeze on my 06 Crv ... Been doing this for 10 years now ... Works great
Brilliant presentation, sure the oil companies do not want this figured out. Ford should make this standard system on all eco boost engines.
I'm currently looking for a good ecoboost Fusion with a blown motor (early ecoboost head gasket failure) just for that reason...
You are so right on most people don't understand that air is the working mediam to start with.
28:1 with 80lbs of boost. Water injected, compound turbos. When the exhaust turns white, it's only using 10% fuel. 4500 hp and 5000lbs of torque. It's a combo of early WWII aircraft turbo diesel with nitrous injection and steam locomotives mixing in 10% diesel fuel. Methanol has been used for additional output longer than you have been around David.
What did they use it for?
Who built this
@@dennis-nz5im tractor pullers.
@dennis-nz5im I've built many like it. Same way we can change the color of smoke on turbine jet powered dragster.
I would like you to expand on this subject. You seem quite experienced and knowledgeable.
I think Harry Ricardo, did a lot of tables for WWII planes. What you seem to be describing is a setup creating enough heat through compression to create a steam engine here.
Build it here for us?
Thanks for sharing. Very eye opening!!
Definitely curious on this one
Hi, I’m 52, I profess to really enjoying listening to you, I’ve always had respect for men with years and wisdom…I’d like to ponder doing this on my 2007 durango, my daily driver work truck…fuel is expensive in Canada, even in alberta at 1.40$ per litre
David Vizard is misleading you.
the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel.
We know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel..
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly.
To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster .
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke.
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance.
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster.
And by retarding the timing because the fuel igniting faster, more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke.
Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal effici @mrdg the water is further slowing down the burning of fuel..we know this because ignition timing remains in a advanced.setting. therefore reducing the thermal efficiency and wasting energy from the input fuel..
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly.
To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition and the complete burning of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarted not advance if fuel burnt faster .
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more energy /heat to expand the working medium to.push the piston down only on the power stroke.
As Mr. Vizard clearly pointed out fuel in a ICE burns and burns slowly. To actually improve thermal efficiency the ignition of the fuel needs to faster and therefore ignition timing would be required to be retarded not advance.
By increasing the fuel burn speed it will produce more workable energy /heat to convert the working medium into a gas to push the piston down faster.
And by retarding the timing more energy can be directed to push the piston down on the power stroke.
Water does not improve burn rate of fuel it does not improve thermal efficiency / combustion efficiency of fuel..
Green vapour draw enhances combustion efficiency prove me wrong Mr. Vizard. .
Bruce Crower's Six cycle engine uses water to generate steam on the fifth cycle by utilizing the heat left over from the power and exhaust cycle.
Came here to make sure someone mentioned the Crower cycle.
All I can say is WOW!!!
I will say I thoroughly injoyed this video!!!
I don’t understand why this tech isn’t being taken advantage of. I n production vehicles.
Thank you David for proving something I’ve been doing for years
Your totally right the tuning makes the difference and don’t use alcohol unless freezing is an issue
I did have great results with nitromethane/methanol sprayed in conjunction with water methanol through a nitrous nozzle on a 14:1 motor cycle with ridiculous timing using a unconventional method to obtain optimum droplet size
Were you using a 'heat pipe' wrapped around exhaust?
@@1crazypj yes I was
I never thought of water injection turning a petrol engine into a hybrid petrol-steam engine. Excellent!
Wish i could have this man build me an engine! He knows things most of us couldn't even fathom!
I am glad I found your channel. Years ago I read your book "Performance With Economy". It was a very enlightening book.
I wonder what other interesting subjects Mr Vizard has in his mind? This had my full attention!
In 1978 I bought a new Z28, Art Nolte Scottsdale automotive and I built a turbo system for it. I installed a Hob switch with a windshield washer container and modified squirter attached to the aircleaner. Mixture of water methanol. Activate at wide open throttle.
This is absolutely most accurate video i have ever seen on the subject of water injection period!
I have been researching and testing straight water injection as well as up to 50% water/methanol injection and almost everything I have found about the subject can summarized right from this video, as well as some things i had not considered. One of those things being, the idea of elimination of a power stroke and addition of a steam stroke. Absolutely genius! Another is possibly using the direct injection system as a water injection instead of fuel for that cycle. Possibly also direct water injection into the cylinder for ultra high performance with ethanol e85 rail injection combined to produce a methanol power level with ethanol? Might need a but of nitro mixed in for that tho....LOL
anyhow I just wanted to thank you for all the great information you continue to post on your channel!!!
THANK YOU!!!
There was a turbo book from the 70s that talks about water injection. Artificial octane enhancer. Takes up space between the fuel/air and slows rate of combustion, helps carry heat out of the exhaust valve. When sprayed into the compressor of a turbo it increases adiabatic efficiency by about 25%. I have run water injection into a non intercooled TD VW and it increased boost at a much lower intake temp by about 25%.ran almost 40psi of boost on that engine. The water injection also cleaned up the smoke from the modified injection pump.
Listening to David once again, I rememeber from one of Eldred's comments. On WOT at 6000RPM, he squirted 6 litres of water in a minute without drama. Use a venturi and air pressure to suck water up and atomise it for use. Works very well if done right. The smaller the droplets the better it will work, hence using Metho or similar to breakdown surface tension, thus generating a finer mist. I used water down the carb throat as a decarb system. Cost a lot less than stripping an engine to decoke. TRY IT, YOU'LL LIKE IT!
I know years ago when I was taking to a old Ford Mech who worked at the ford factory and he also built airplane during WWII and he said that they used a gallon of water with a qt. of trany fluid mixed together, but they just poured it down the carb slowly to clean off the valve and the cylinder's. He said they use that at the ford plant if someone came in with a bunch of carbon build up, that's how they cleaned it out instead of tearing it apart to fix the problem. I did that with a 67 ford mustang with about 50,000 before I tore it done to check the bearing. After I tore it apart I could see all the cylinders and valves were completely carbon free with no build up at all.
I did this years ago on a 428 CJ Mustang with a oil furnace nozzle and a windshield washer pump . When I turned it on the idea of the engine went up a bit.
In terms of water droplet size, think about the use of water atomizer currently being used as a vaporizer in a kids room during low humidity winter nights. The vapor exits as a fog.
water misting heads sold at home depot work well.. creates a well atomized fog.
Excellent coverage of the subject, maybe a small note of the effect of volume change of liquid to vapor
on the cylinder total pressure and flame speed vs compression ratio on spark timing could be expanded...
My first car, which I know you're quite familiar with, was a 1971 Capri 2000 (high school graduation gift). After climbing the ladder of Offenhauser Dual Port intake manifold plus headers>Offy DualPort intake with Holley 390 4bbl, I graduated to an Ak Miller Rajay turbo setup. While in college a mechanically gifted friend cobbled up a rudimentary water injection system using the factory windshield washer pump and nozzle shooting water down the secondary throat of the stock Weber 2V carb triggered by a Hobbs switch at WOT. I was able to essentially double my boost, I think up to 15-16 psi and that 2300 lb. car was quite fast.
I ran water injection 45 years ago. It was effective to stop spark knock with extra advance on my 352 in my 66 F250
Back in the mid-70s I had a 11 to 1 350 in my three-quarter ton Chevy truck and camper towed a heavy trailer at the same time. Edelbrock made a water injection kit that varied the water injected by manifold vacuum and engine ROM. The small box (brain) controlled the the water injection by turning on and varying the speed of the water pump to vary water flow. This worked out exceptionally well as without the water injection it would just detonate, to the point of making it undrivable on the premium pump gas available without a lot of 104 Real Lead additive. The only downside was if you use city water it would calcify the nozzle. Easy to clean as nozzle was in the air cleaner lid over the primary chole air horn in carb. But plumbed the water source into the camper water tank (30 gallons).In the San Diego area we could not go anywhere without going through mountains. When not towing it would run on 89 octane regular. This was with 39 degrees of total timing on a custom curved Mallory Dual point distributor. Truck had a all synchro 4 speed Sainaw with overdrive tranny, 456 gears 33" tire. To Vegas's 8and back running 65-85 mph it got 12-13 mpg towing. 3000 rpm in overdrive was 110 mph. Underload towing through the mountains I would use a gallon plus of water in 30 miles. Water is a lot cheaper than race gas or octane booster. This was old school with a 625 cfm vacuum secondary dual inlet Holley center pivot. It took quite a bit of time and patience to dial everything in. But that was also my business (Precision Carburation & Fuel Injection). It was truly a labor of love & learning.
I have used Snow water Injection on my own and customer's vehicles with great results since then.
Thank you David for spreading the gospel of water Injection. 42:33
Years ago I worked for an ICE research facility. We did a bit of work with hydrogen. Making this stuff burn clean was really difficult. We ended up with a system using direct injection of BOTH water and H2, through a single coaxial injector. It was a bit complex, but worked!
I've given quite a bit of thought to running two common rail injectors in each cylinder . One fuel, one water, and yes random, computer, controlled, firings and steam / cooling squirts . Also, much consideration of using the heat extraction as steam expansion . And yes, this is an expansion ( no pun ) of Bruce Crower's idea .
Chevy Metro.
@@tomstulc9143 GEO Metro...
the trick would get to get a GDI pump that will put up with water. A few degrees after ignition, shoot in a micro-spritz of water and get a second power stroke.
Along with all the cooling of the waste heat that would heat the radiator and exhaust pipe.
The local Kia plant is close to my house and I always wanted to get a friend to seal a pump so I could look at doing that to my 454BBC jetboat.
Turns out the federal gobment really frowns on 'liberating' free-trade parts that haven't been taxed. lol
@@earlbrown,,, see above .
i've heard of using a haltech controlled solenoid> mapped off gas injector signal duty cycles= to trigger water injector... samething as diy> 555timer&pwm circuits- for a few dollars👍
When I was 15 , a plumber-friend suggested brazing a tank onto the exhaust manifold of my old LIP-Vauxhall (first-car). It would have a copper-pipe flattened at the-end , going into the top of the-carb . It never eventuated but the steam-produced , was meant to work something like water-injection . In 1981, Yamaha produced the first 1-litre Japanese V-twin motorcycle (TR1 ) , the rear-carb had a larger main-jet to cool the-hotter rear-cylinder , I haven't heard of it before (I still ride it ) , I increased that plugs heat-range by 1, to make the rear-plug last-longer, it all seems to work ok . I wonder if 'Vape-Technology' could be used to introduce steam into engines ? ..I could do-with a bit-more 'Go' in the old-girl . Dave NZ
Nice plug for AEM. The founder was a true guru.
David thanks for the great information!!! I too have been using and experimenting with water injection for fuel economy on my lean-burn 30:1 A/F ratio 4G63 turbo engine. I pick up some key performance points that I will be adding to my build.
Nice tip with the soluble oil.
I hope to hear more about this. Some real world testing and how the common man can use this.
Hello, I am working on a project involving a diesel engine, and I would like to test water injection. My theory is to inject the water after the intercooler. In my opinion, injecting water before the turbo is not a good idea because the turbo has a harder time spooling up, and moreover, water tends to condense in the intercooler despite being well atomized. Additionally, it is definitely advantageous to have steam on the hot side of the turbo to assist in spooling it up at low RPMs.
This is a rabbit hole of research and you gave most of the key points - tysm David.
Finally someone speak about it. Why it's not used more by manufacturers.
2:58 N.A.C.A. - National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
The US agency predecessor to NASA, they published so much amazing research in the 1920s and 1930s regarding engine tuning, propeller design, and especially aerodynamics for everything from intake ducts to radiators to control surfaces. They even released detailed plans for specific wing shapes (NACA airfoils), research that benefited planes like the P51 Mustang.
Thanks for reaffirming my understanding of water injection.
Thanks!
I use a dry cell type HHO Hydrogen Generator on my 1999 Ford Ranger's 2.5 Liter 4 cylinder engine, which boosts mileage tremendously. This motor require 87 octane ONLY, any more damages the engine according to the repair and owner';s manuals. I have run this for 3 years now and have not had any major problem using it. Matter of fact, this has paid for itself many times over during this time of price gouging by Big Oil. I'm not going for raw power, but range (Better Mileage) and reliability. This engine currently has just shy of 226000 miles on it and this little truck handles the mountains of Southeastern Kentucky like nothing is there. BTW The Ranger is my daily driver. I built this truck from junkyard wrecks. Cost maybe around $500. All I have left to do is give it a decent paint job. I'm looking hard at University Of Kentucky Blue. I do not have a lot of money to work with to start with so I do what I can with what I have.
did your hho kit require a gizmo to trick the O2 sensor,,, or do you drive without its function/engine light on no problems.... (in newer cars>the leaner cleaner> exhaust sensor tells the ecu computer to add more gas=worse mileage)