I agree adding methanol to the fuel system will work, but it?s not practical IMO. The way I see it, if you?re going to go this route, you might as well go with toluene, race gas, or Torco. Also, the oxygenated fuel that is now used widely is done with ethanol, not methanol. Methanol is far more corrosive than ethanol.
You?re correct that if a WI or AI system fails the knock sensors will retard timing. If the engines are relying very heavily on WI/AI, there?s a good chance the knock sensors will not be able to save the engine from detonation. I personally set my base tune around a 12.5:1 a/f ratio w/o alky so in the event my AI fails, there?s not a fear of my engine going overly lean. Some people rely heavily on their WI/AI and if it fails the engine is toast? doesn?t matter if it?s WI or AI at that point IMO.
Sorry, my 20% figure was an estimate. I base this on my usage on road racing tracks. Much of my track time is at WOT so I make this assumption based on gas/alky ussage. Call it black magic. My system is boost referenced and progressive. This is completely controllable by me, not some POS on/off cheap $159 kit.
The reason I like injecting methanol over toluene is methanol drastically lowers the IAT? toluene will not. They both will increase the octane level of the fuel, but the huge IAT drop that alky offers is SO beneficial for FI applications. Many people are finding that methanol is so effective at dropping IAT that they are no longer using intercoolers to cool the air charge which has obvious benefits. Methanol may have only half the amount of latent heat reduction than water does, but water will not reduce IAT anywhere nearly as much as methanol. This drastic reduction in IAT with methanol equates to highly reduced chance of detonation. In a nutshell, water and methanol both reduce latent heat and reduce the air charge temps, but water is better a reducing latent heat while methanol is better at reducing IAT. Toluene can?t compare to either in these regards.
No, I do not think there?s a failsafe system on the market. Until a system has some type of feedback system integrated to the factory ECM, the system will not be failsafe. I think AI/WI is quickly catching on in the world of FI, but it?s going to take time for it to grow. The cheap kits on the market are functional, but will never be accepted by an serious enthusiast. The AI/WI kit must be completely controllable for it to be accepted by tuners.
Working with straight alky does have some risks. If a tank must be mounted inside the passenger compartment, I would recommend using a small fuel cell (like you would with gas). Otherwise, I wouldn?t worry so much if the tank is mounted outside the passenger compartment. Alky is flammable, but it also evaporates very quickly. I?ve squirted straight alky on hot headers and it just evaporates. This is not to say there?s not a risk of fire? there is, but I don?t think it?s a major concern. If you want to be technical about it, just about all the fluids in your car are flammable. The best you can do is have a robust system to minimize the chance of problems. Safe container, SS lines, good fittings, check valves? BUT, these things cost money. The $159 kits you mentioned do not include these items, you get what you pay for. Many of these kits are not boost or MAF referenced and are not progressive in nature? these are MUSTS IMO. Personally, I wouldn?t consider installing a system in my car unless I thought it would be top quality, safe, very controllable, and reliable. These things don?t come cheap. The general public just won?t accept anything less in a good kit. I think there?s only one kit on the market that IMO that comes close to meeting these criteria, and it is still about $500.
Scot
|