Meth / water injection - revisited - Page 4

Feb 1, 2018 | 01:53 AM

#76

Brettus

Thread Starter

Boosted Kiwi

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 20,830

Likes: 1,775

From: Y-cat-o NZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeamRX8

I'm questioning what it is about your patent that is a unique discovery or invention?

Have you seen the same idea before ?

Feb 1, 2018 | 08:15 AM

#77

TeamRX8

Registered

iTrader: (25)

Joined: Apr 2005

Posts: 26,932

Likes: 2,137

No, again I had worked at the Patent office and prior art is the #1 reason most patents are rejected. That you took what was already available and applied it to a rotary engine, whether you were the first person to do it or not, is just applying existing concepts and not patent worthy imo. I'm only asking the question to see what I might be missing. Not sure what you're afraid of by obviously avoiding answering it?

Feb 1, 2018 | 09:09 AM

#78

jcbrx8

Registered

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 1,105

Likes: 404

From: Collierville, TN

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeamRX8

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.

Team, True, but your comment presumes leveraging W/M to tune for higher boost &/or timing, right?

In the interest of reliability...what are the drawbacks or issues of WM injection purely as det control, carbon cleaning, and potentially EGT reduction?

As I understand it, aside from poor tuning... heat is the death knell of our engines. Therefore, anything which c/b done to proactively remove heat is good, no?

Last edited by jcbrx8; Feb 1, 2018 at 09:15 AM.