TurboDodge.com MarketPlace Shelby Registry Contact Us

Advertisement - Remove these ads today by clicking here.
 

Go Back   TurboDodge.Com - Turbo Dodge forum for Turbo Mopars, Shelbys, Daytona, SRT-4, PT Cruiser, Omni and more! > Turbo Dodge Technical Chat > Engine Management, Fuel, Spark, EGTs, and Air/Fuel Ratios > Alcohol / Methanol / Water Injection

Alcohol / Methanol / Water Injection Discussion about alternative injection systems.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools

Old 08-31-2005, 09:56 PM   #1
water injection on a t1  
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: minneapolis

My Ride: 1985 omni glh
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 51
Feedback: (0)
im thinking about putting water injection on my 1985 glh but i was talking to a guy i work with and he told me that its a bad idea because my air intake comes off the tb so it would hydrolock the engine right away is this true?
if thats true(which i dont think it is) is there another way to do it?
i just think the guy i work with doesnt want me to beat his honda.
thanks
tyler
1985glh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2005, 11:03 PM   #2
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Saskatchewan

My Ride: 1987 Duster
Engine: 2.2 T1 convert
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 232
Feedback: (0)
no its not true if you have check valves/solenoids set up correctly to stop water from being siphoned in.
thedanielm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2005, 01:07 AM   #3
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: minneapolis

My Ride: 1985 omni glh
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 51
Feedback: (0)
so i just make sure its not leaking/spraying alot in to there and it worrk right
1985glh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2005, 11:49 AM   #4
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: WA

Induct: S/C
1/4: 12.330

Posts: 56
Feedback: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1985glh
im thinking about putting water injection on my 1985 glh but i was talking to a guy i work with and he told me that its a bad idea because my air intake comes off the tb so it would hydrolock the engine right away is this true?
if thats true(which i dont think it is) is there another way to do it?
i just think the guy i work with doesnt want me to beat his honda.
thanks
tyler
This guy doen't know jack. Number one there is less than a inch of vacuum in the intake when the throttle body blade is closed. It's not enough to siphon water from the pump. You need at least 8 inchs of vac in most cases to siphon. A simple 1psi check valve is all that is needed for 99% of water injection systems and this is only if you have mounted the tank higher than your nozzle.
dvldoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2005, 12:10 AM   #5
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: minneapolis

My Ride: 1985 omni glh
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 51
Feedback: (0)
yeah thats what i thought
just wanted to check
1985glh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2005, 02:07 AM   #6
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Saskatchewan

My Ride: 1987 Duster
Engine: 2.2 T1 convert
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 232
Feedback: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvldoc
This guy doen't know jack. Number one there is less than a inch of vacuum in the intake when the throttle body blade is closed. It's not enough to siphon water from the pump. You need at least 8 inchs of vac in most cases to siphon. A simple 1psi check valve is all that is needed for 99% of water injection systems and this is only if you have mounted the tank higher than your nozzle.
umm at idle (when the throttle blade is closed) you should have approx 17inhg of vaccum what are you talking about?

but yes a simple check valve will solve all that siphoning problems.
thedanielm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2005, 06:10 PM   #7
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: WA

Induct: S/C
1/4: 12.330

Posts: 56
Feedback: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedanielm
umm at idle (when the throttle blade is closed) you should have approx 17inhg of vaccum what are you talking about?

but yes a simple check valve will solve all that siphoning problems.
17 of vac is before the blade not after it. I can show you a few hundred installs of it just like that if you need to see what I'm talking about.

If you mounted the nozzle in a spacer between the intake and the throttle body then yes you need a check valve. But just like the Grand prix, SRT-4, WRX, Buick Grand national, All LS1 applications mounted pre throttle body ect, ect, and ect. we don't use a check valve unless the tank is mounted higher than the nozzle itself.

Yes your car makes vacuum at idle but that vac is behind the blade, Connect your boost vac gauge in the intake pipe, get a reading then you'll see what I'm talking about your vac will be less than 1in. Now if you have a odd set up like the NON-IC grand nationals where the turbo is right on the throttle body and you plane on putting the nozzle in the Tb after the blade you will need the check valve.
dvldoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2005, 11:58 AM   #8
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampa Bay, FL USA

My Ride: 1991 Spirit R/T
Engine: 2.2L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 2,392
Feedback: (0)
The 85' GLH uses a suck through setup (i.e. the TB is before the inlet of the turbo).
4sfed4 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

» Quick Nav
- Home
- Classifieds
- Timeslips
- Gallery
- Vendors
-- Directory
- Tech Articles
- Donate
Sponsors
remove ads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1
Free Online Games | Payday Loan | Mortgage Calculator | Debt | Modded Xbox


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:18 PM.

Page generated in 0.38415 seconds with 13 queries