When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Seems this thread has evolved over time…and contradictory “experiential” results h/b reported. It is commonly thought that W/M injection in “some” %, say ~33-50%, can have some advantages:
• Det control,
• EGT cooling,
• Fuel enrichment,
• Carbon cleaning.
(2010) MM shares his experience w/ W/M that it was difficult to dial in injector nozzle size & mix ratio to avoid backfire and power LOSS. Leading to his conclusions:
• W/M c/b used to tune for increased HP/Trg at the risk of engine failure if the W/M system fails.
• Tuning to safer AFR & timing is a better approach than leveraging W/M as det control only.
(2010) OD seems to be running & tracking w/ W/M with good success re: det control, & charge temps…realizing many factors contribute to these results.
(2014) Brettus shares his experience running 270ccs at a 12psi onset on a 17 psi system w/ no drop in power or increase in EGTs. (Which seems in direct opposition to MM’s 2010 experience)
Brettus, are you running W/M for safety only… or are you tuning w/ it?
Generally, Regarding the rightful concern of the risk of tuning w/ W/M in the event of a failure of the W/M delivery system, has anyone attempted implementing fail safes, … to cut boost, retard timing, etc.? I’ve seen no discussion of these. Would the failsafe response times be sufficient to prohibit engine damage?
Just trying to clearly understand what h/b done. Thanks.
Brettus, are you running W/M for safety only… or are you tuning w/ it?
.
I actually gave up on W/M after getting some detonation with it fully operational and putting in around 350cc . I think the manifold is too long and curvaceous , which is leading to much of the spray coming out of suspension. Perhaps with a finer spray and some more development it would work but I decided I felt a LOT more comfortable just running a higher octane fuel (E30)
E85 is much better for sure but you still need the correct settings like timing and such, hard parts like apex seals matter too. A lot of supposedly indestructible apex seals that won't blow out on high boost, detonation, etc. typically have other issues like how they wear on rotor housing surfaces and such. They are typically not a good match for E85 use. Steel or "true" ceramic seals like Iannetti are what should be used for E85.
Originally Posted by Brettus
"I actually gave up on W/M after getting some detonation with it fully operational and putting in around 350cc . I think the manifold is too long and curvaceous , which is leading to much of the spray coming out of suspension."
Brettus - Different language, but perhaps there’s some convergence between yours & MM results: difficulty dialing in injection quantity for “good” results…, bogging/ backfiring, which would make sense if the H2O was falling out of suspension w/in our labyrinth of intake runners, rather than vaporizing in the combustion chamber. W/b interesting to see the results of W/M injection directly into the LIM, ;-)
While running W/M did you observe ANY advantages, e.g. reduced IATS or EGTs?
Team - H/b reading on E85 as well, doesn’t suit my objectives. I’m currently awaiting hardware to begin a 6S MT build for reliable, thus my interest in W/M, ~325 HP DD. E85 fuel economy is a non-starter.
Between a rock & hard place regarding apex seals. In a perfect $$ world I’d pull, have my engine built w/ better FI seals prior to FI. Lol, but alas I don’t inhabit that world. I’ve 60k on my engine, ~740kPa @ ~220 rpm both rotors, and currently pre-mix. Installation of the FI kit is hopefully a longterm commitment. Plan w/b to drive until it fails, hopefully ~30k+ FI mi., then install FI seals on a re-build.
More reliable than what you’d typically see here on the forum if it was built and tuned properly. There have been a few successful members doing more than 325 rwhp.
More reliable than what you’d typically see here on the forum if it was built and tuned properly. There have been a few successful members doing more than 325 rwhp.
QFT... With the correct component selection, a proper installation and a solid tune it's definitely doable.
Reliably and daily driven? No way Jose. More reliable than what is typically seen here, well yeah but that ain't saying much. But I guess what ones considers reliable is subjective.
9k - Hoping not too ...what w/ the likes of resources like yourself, Brettus, Team, et. al.
Still curious about why Brettus & MM were not able to duplicate Warner's findings in "Street Rotary"? Nozzle size?,... location?, spray pressure / atomization? Really w/b nice to have a bit-o insurance, not interested in tuning w/ it.
Well good luck man there is no magic potion and people can claim all sorts of things online but in the real world boosting a Renesis is a waste of time if you are looking for power and any sense of reliability. My setup has been reliable for the past several years but it has taken a lot of work to get it there and I still would not drive this car daily or for any great distance.
Posted by 9krpmrx8
Well good luck man there is no magic potion and people can claim all sorts of things online but in the real world boosting a Renesis is a waste of time if you are looking for power and any sense of reliability.
Thanks and understood, bit of a fools-errand, which we've chosen to undertake.
Buuuut you speak as if you've not been boosted since 4Q2011, w/ no blown engines...if your creds are correct, eh?
E85 might be terrible but I've found my economy with E30 is practically the same as straight petrol ...
Originally Posted by jcbrx8
Brettus - Different language, but perhaps there’s some convergence between yours & MM results: difficulty dialing in injection quantity for “good” results…, bogging/ backfiring, which would make sense if the H2O was falling out of suspension w/in our labyrinth of intake runners, rather than vaporizing in the combustion chamber. W/b interesting to see the results of W/M injection directly into the LIM, ;-)
While running W/M did you observe ANY advantages, e.g. reduced IATS or EGTs?
.
I def. considered direct into LIM but gave up on the idea when I found an E85 pump close by.
My IAT sensor was upstream of the w/m nozzle so never saw what the deal was there . As far as egts goes , I never noticed any change but I was only comparing single pulls ...perhaps with sustained boost there would be a difference.
Thanks and understood, bit of a fools-errand, which we've chosen to undertake.
Buuuut you speak as if you've not been boosted since 4Q2011, w/ no blown engines...if your creds are correct, eh?
Yes, and compression was okay at 8.2ish across the board on my last test a year or so ago and that was actually a slight improvement but i chalked it up to my tester. I'll get the tester out and test it again here soon just to see where she is at. I have been running and E30 mix for two years or so now and it's the best the car has ever ran and it is my belief that the tuning done prior to having Steve Kan tune it may have taken some life out of the engine and that is my fault for dicking around with remote tuning.
I have had the turbo rebuilt thanks to Turdblown but that was early on and the turbo has been great (highly recommend majestic Turbo in Waco, TX) for the last few years since then and I give some of that credit to the oil pressure regulator setup as a few of my friends went thru Greddy turbos rather quickly on their 8's.
9k - Hoping not too ...what w/ the likes of resources like yourself, Brettus, Team, et. al.
Still curious about why Brettus & MM were not able to duplicate Warner's findings in "Street Rotary"? Nozzle size?,... location?, spray pressure / atomization? Really w/b nice to have a bit-o insurance, not interested in tuning w/ it.
If look in rotary swaps, I just put up a post where I did a 1-3 gear pull shooting 500 cc/min of 50:50 mix into my greddy elbow and 250cc/min of 50:50 into the turbo. Only saw an increase of 15 degrees F during the run. Boost is 15-18 psi.
Well you did have to rebuild after only a short run time and you also don’t have a Renesis engine
My issue with water/meth injection is if there’s ever a problem in the delivery system you can go from zoom-zoom to boom-boom in the blink of an eye.
I also get the E85 mileage concern. But you get a lot more protection on E85 than E30 and that’s a big plus in my book for a boosted engine with 10:1 compression and zero port timing overlap. I’m lucky to have a station just around the corner from my house.
There is a substantial octane improvement between
RG and E10, and between E10 and E50. However, between
E50 and E85 there is very little difference in either RON or
MON.
I don't really see much in that paper than other why your patent idea should be rejected based on prior knowledge
You really think the fact that EGR is a recognised method of getting good fuel economy is 'prior knowledge' for a patent on a rotary engine ?
Anyway ... that's not why I linked the article :
A major reason for this prediction is the ability of ethanol addition to reduce combustion knock and enable an increased compression ratio. Interestingly, work by Szybist and West demonstrates that blending ethanol, even with very low-octane gasoline blendstocks, offers significant antiknock resistance and that a high-octane fuel can be produced through blending intermediate levels of ethanol with straight-run-gasoline. This is because of the highly nonlinear response of octane number blending with ethanol on a volumetric basis
01-29-2018, 11:36 AM
but you still need the correct settings like timing and such, hard parts like apex seals matter too. A lot of supposedly indestructible apex seals that won't blow out on high boost, detonation, etc. typically have other issues like how they wear on rotor housing surfaces and such. They are typically not a good match for E85 use. Steel or "true" ceramic seals like Iannetti are what should be used for E85.
...what w/ the likes of resources like yourself, Brettus, Team, et. al. 
